Hey RUMSFELD! Who's your NAZI?

CIA-Nazi Link Grows Clearer as More Documents Come to Light

Nazi war criminal Adolf Eichmann stands trial in Jerusalem in 1961. Apparently, the CIA knew of his whereabouts as early as 1958.

Ron Kampeas
Jewish Telegraphic Agency
WASHINGTON

A former Nazi rose to the highest ranks of a Western intelligence agency - and was a Soviet mole. A lead to Adolf Eichmann was ignored. A spy whose pathological lies made him useless, but who still escaped prosecution for war crimes.

These are among the revelations found among some 8 million pages of documents released here Tuesday that deal with German and Japanese war crimes, including 27,000 pages that detail the relationship after World War II between U.S. government agencies and suspected Nazis war criminals.

The message threading the documents was clear: The price one pays for consorting with evil men far outweighs the return.
"Using very bad people can have very bad consequences," Elizabeth Holtzman, a former U.S. congresswoman and a member of the Interagency Working Group that released the documents, said at a news conference last Tuesday at the National Archives. The group was established in 1999 to declassify rooms full of documents related to Nazi war crimes.

The mandate was later extended to Japanese war crimes.

CONTINUED…

http://www.jewishexponent.com/article/3617/

The CIA's History Problem is Our History Problem

By David Wallace
Fri Jun 16, 9:22 PM ET

The author David Lowenthal once noted that the "past is a foreign country." The past might be better described as being more like a moving target - always in transition and susceptible (and vulnerable) to becoming unrecognizable to what we once believed. And more often than not new revelations are disorientating and troubling.

EXCERPT…

Such is the case with recent news accounts in the Washington Post and the New York Times that in the late 1950s the CIA knew that Adolf Eichmann was living in Argentina and had a pretty close pseudonym for him (Clemens instead of the actual alias of Klement), but did nothing to bring him to justice. That the CIA sought the cooperation and protection of Nazis, even those guilty of war crimes, after World War Two to serve its Cold War struggles is not news. But the extent of these relationships and the depths the CIA went through to protect them is news. These disclosures have been made possible through the ongoing efforts of the Nazi War Crimes and Japanese Imperial Government Records Interagency Working Group (IWG), launched over eight years ago by the Nazi War Crimes Disclosure Act (Public Law 105-246). The key that unlocked this unsavory history has been the unparalleled access granted to the IWG into formerly secret government records and archives.

Concern over these disclosures extend beyond the sad facts surfaced by the IWG: such as official protection of Nazis residing in the United States and the CIA's post-war use of top Eichmann aides. They also include the entirely unconscionable fact that it has taken generations for the CIA to disclose this information, and only did so after a special act of Congress supplemented by years long battles to protect them from public knowledge. IWG member Thomas H. Baer pointed to such battles when he thanked the CIA for finally coming clean this past week. However, coming clean occurred only after "reversal of policy of thinly veiled noncompliance" with the IWG's legal mandate and the ongoing efforts of members of Congress and (some) IWG members and staff in making an "ironclad case decrying CIAs misinterpretation of its obligations."

Why has the CIA taken so long to open such records and archives? And do the excuses proffered around protecting national security really hold any credible value? I think the answer to the second question must be no, of course not. As to the first question, that is a trickier one, but one must look beyond the legal loopholes that protect secret information for such inordinate periods and look to see what agendas are at play. Clearly one agenda is to provide a simplistic and comforting (and at times woefully inaccurate) past as a means of enabling an ignorant, but strongly held, patriotism as a form of social glue that (kind of) holds society together. But a simplistic and comforting and inaccurate past can only be realized through the unreasonable, though legal, controls granted to the CIA over its historical records and archives. And it is in these seemingly rationally derived controls that the past itself can be held hostage.

http://news.yahoo.com/s/huffpost/2006061... LINK BUSTED. So sorry. I'LL FIND ALTERNATE.

Within the confines of (Angleton’s) remarkable life were most of America’s secrets. “You know how I got to be in charge of counterintelligence? I agreed not to polygraph or require detailed background checks on Allen Dulles and 60 of his closest friends... They were afraid that their own business dealings with Hitler’s pals would come out. They were too arrogant to believe that the Russians would discover it all. . . . You know, the CIA got tens of thousands of brave people killed. . . We played with lives as if we owned them. We gave false hope. We - I - so misjudged what happened."

CONTINUED...

http://www.spartacus.schoolnet.co.uk/SSangleton.htm

Allen Dulles, the NAZIs, and the CIA

Supreme Court Justice Arthur Goldberg once stated that "The Dulles brothers were traitors." Some historians believe that Allen Dulles became head of the newly formed CIA in large part to cover up his treasonous behavior and that of his clients.
-- Christian Dewar, Making a Killing

Just before his death, James Jesus Angleton, the legendary chief of counterintelligence at the Central Intelligence Agency, was a bitter man. He felt betrayed by the people he had worked for all his life. In the end, he had come to realize that they were never really interested in American ideals of "freedom" and "democracy." They really only wanted "absolute power."

Angleton told author Joseph Trento that the reason he had gotten the counterintelligence job in the first place was by agreeing not to submit "sixty of Allen Dulles' closest friends" to a polygraph test concerning their business deals with the Nazis. In his end-of-life despair, Angleton assumed that he would see all his old companions again "in hell."
-- Michael Hasty, Paranoid Shift

EXCERPT…

Allen Welsh Dulles was born to privilege and a tradition of public service. He was the grandson of one secretary of state and the nephew of another. But by the time he graduated from Princeton in 1914, the robber baron era of American history was coming to an an end, ushered out by the Sherman Anti-Trust Act -- which had been used in 1911 to break up Standard Oil -- and by the institution of the progressive income tax in 1913. The ruling elite was starting to view government less as their own private preserve and more as an unwanted intrusion on their ability to conduct business as usual. That shift of loyalties in itself may account for many of the paradoxical aspects of Dulles's career.

Dulles entered the diplomatic service after college and served as a State Department delegate to the Paris Peace Conference of 1919, which brought a formal end to World War I. The Versailles Treaty which came out of this conference included a provision making it illegal to sell arms to Germany. This displeased the powerful DuPont family, and they put pressure on the delegates to allow them to opt out. It was Allen Dulles who finally gave them the assurances they wanted that their transactions with Germany would be "winked at."

Dulles remained a diplomat through the early 1920's, spending part of that time in Berlin. However, he left government service in 1926 for the greener pastures of private business, becoming a Wall Street lawyer with the same firm as his older brother, John Foster Dulles.

By the middle 20's, Germany had started recovering from the effects of the war and its postwar economic collapse, and the great German industrial firms were looking like attractive investment opportunities for wealthy Americans. W.A. Harriman & Co., formed in 1919 by Averell Harriman (son of railroad baron E.H. Hariman) and George Herbert Walker, had led the way in directing American money to German companies and had opened a Berlin branch as early as 1922, when Germany was still in chaos. At that time, Averell Harriman traveled to Europe and made contact with the powerful Thyssen family of steel magnates. It was to be a long-lasting and fateful partnership.

CONTINUED…

http://www.enter.net/~torve/trogholm/secret/rightroots/dulles.html

Two Kinds of Knowledge: Maps and Stories

HENRY H. BAUER
Chemistry & Science Studies
Virginia Polytechnic Institute & State University
Blacksburg, VA 24061-0212

Abstract—The most reliable knowledge is map-like: “If you do this, then that will always follow.” But such knowledge carries little if any inherent human meaning. Most meaningful is story-like knowledge, which teaches about morals and values; but about that, agreement cannot be forced by demonstration. Failure to distinguish between the meaningfulness and the reliability of knowledge helps to make arguments intractable. It would be very useful always to ask about a bit of claimed knowledge, “Is this more like a story or more like a map ?”The ProblemBitter and long-standing disputes are everywhere, over what is right and what is wrong. Concerning anomalous claims, arguments of that sort are familiarenough to readers of this journal. But where does the authority lie to settle such an argument?The belief is common that where knowledge is concerned science (and only science) is authoritative. This underlies the fuss about C. P. Snow’s (1959) contrasting of “The Two Cultures”, the scientific and the literary. The view-point is perhaps most clearly exemplified by such groups as the Committee for the Scientific Investigation of Claims of the Paranormal (see its magazine, Skeptical Inquirer); but it is general throughout society, illustrated for instance by the frequently expressed belief that a lack of scientific literacy augurs doom for our society (Bauer 1992a, chapter 1).Science and religion are typically portrayed either as entirely separate and incommensurable or else as antagonists, with science standing for knowledge and religion standing for “values”. Thus Appleyard (1992) argues explicitly that science has separated values from knowledge. Earlier societies saw the world as human-centered, he says; they interpreted Nature from a human standpoint and ascribed moral and transcendent characteristics to some aspects of Nature; whereas nowadays we see the world as impersonal and interpret (or seek to interpret) human beings from Nature’s standpoint as revealed by the natural sciences. In such an impersonal world, moral values are only happenstance in human culture, not anything inherent in the universe.The real issue is the meaning or value of knowledge for human beings andwhere the authority to certify knowledge resides. Typically, discussion has257

Full story HTML: http://72.14.203.104/search?q=cache:Mgkr6DiUgukJ:www.henryhbauer.homestead.com/2kndsweb.pdf+bauer+map+story&hl=en&gl=us&ct=clnk&cd=7

PDF: http://www.henryhbauer.homestead.com/2kndsweb.pdf#search=%22bauer%20map%20story%22

RE: Concerning Criticism of the Warren Report

1. Our Concern. From the day of President Kennedy's assassination on, there has been speculation about the responsibility for his murder. Although this was stemmed for a time by the Warren Commission report, (which appeared at the end of September 1964), various writers have now had time to scan the Commission's published report and documents for new pretexts for questioning, and there has been a new wave of books and articles criticizing the Commission's findings. In most cases the critics have speculated as to the existence of some kind of conspiracy, and often they have implied that the Commission itself was involved. Presumably as a result of the increasing challenge to the Warren Commission's report, a public opinion poll recently indicated that 46% of the American public did not think that Oswald acted alone, while more than half of those polled thought that the Commission had left some questions unresolved. Doubtless polls abroad would show similar, or possibly more adverse results.

2. This trend of opinion is a matter of concern to the U.S. government, including our organization. The members of the Warren Commission were naturally chosen for their integrity, experience and prominence. They represented both major parties, and they and their staff were deliberately drawn from all sections of the country. Just because of the standing of the Commissioners, efforts to impugn their rectitude and wisdom tend to cast doubt on the whole leadership of American society. Moreover, there seems to be an increasing tendency to hint that President Johnson himself, as the one person who might be said to have benefited, was in some way responsible for the assassination. Innuendo of such seriousness affects not only the individual concerned, but also the whole reputation of the American government. Our organization itself is directly involved: among other facts, we contributed information to the investigation. Conspiracy theories have frequently thrown suspicion on our organization, for example by falsely alleging that Lee Harvey Oswald worked for us. The aim of this dispatch is to provide material countering and discrediting the claims of the conspiracy theorists, so as to inhibit the circulation of such claims in other countries. Background information is supplied in a classified section and in a number of unclassified attachments.

3. Action. We do not recommend that discussion of the assassination question be initiated where it is not already taking place. Where discussion is active addresses are requested:

a. To discuss the publicity problem with (?)and friendly elite contacts (especially politicians and editors), pointing out that the Warren Commission made as thorough an investigation as humanly possible, that the charges of the critics are without serious foundation, and that further speculative discussion only plays into the hands of the opposition. Point out also that parts of the conspiracy talk appear to be deliberately generated by Communist propagandists. Urge them to use their influence to discourage unfounded and irresponsible speculation.

b. To employ propaganda assets to and refute the attacks of the critics. Book reviews and feature articles are particularly appropriate for this purpose. The unclassified attachments to this guidance should provide useful background material for passing to assets. Our ploy should point out, as applicable, that the critics are (I) wedded to theories adopted before the evidence was in, (II) politically interested, (III) financially interested, (IV) hasty and inaccurate in their research, or (V) infatuated with their own theories. In the course of discussions of the whole phenomenon of criticism, a useful strategy may be to single out Epstein's theory for attack, using the attached Fletcher article and Spectator piece for background. (Although Mark Lane's book is much less convincing that Epstein's and comes off badly where confronted by knowledgeable critics, it is also much more difficult to answer as a whole, as one becomes lost in a morass of unrelated details.)
4. In private to media discussions not directed at any particular writer, or in attacking publications which may be yet forthcoming, the following arguments should be useful:


a. No significant new evidence has emerged which the Commission did not consider. The assassination is sometimes compared (e.g., by Joachim Joesten and Bertrand Russell) with the Dreyfus case; however, unlike that case, the attack on the Warren Commission have produced no new evidence, no new culprits have been convincingly identified, and there is no agreement among the critics. (A better parallel, though an imperfect one, might be with the Reichstag fire of 1933, which some competent historians (Fritz Tobias, AJ.P. Taylor, D.C. Watt) now believe was set by Vander Lubbe on his own initiative, without acting for either Nazis or Communists; the Nazis tried to pin the blame on the Communists, but the latter have been more successful in convincing the world that the Nazis were to blame.)

b. Critics usually overvalue particular items and ignore others. They tend to place more emphasis on the recollections of individual witnesses (which are less reliable and more divergent--and hence offer more hand-holds for criticism) and less on ballistics, autopsy, and photographic evidence. A close examination of the Commission's records will usually show that the conflicting eyewitness accounts are quoted out of context, or were discarded by the Commission for good and sufficient reason.

c. Conspiracy on the large scale often suggested would be impossible to conceal in the United States, esp. since informants could expect to receive large royalties, etc. Note that Robert Kennedy, Attorney General at the time and John F. Kennedy's brother, would be the last man to overlook or conceal any conspiracy. And as one reviewer pointed out, Congressman Gerald R. Ford would hardly have held his tongue for the sake of the Democratic administration, and Senator Russell would have had every political interest in exposing any misdeeds on the part of Chief Justice Warren. A conspirator moreover would hardly choose a location for a shooting where so much depended on conditions beyond his control: the route, the speed of the cars, the moving target, the risk that the assassin would be discovered. A group of wealthy conspirators could have arranged much more secure conditions.

d. Critics have often been enticed by a form of intellectual pride: they light on some theory and fall in love with it; they also scoff at the Commission because it did not always answer every question with a flat decision one way or the other. Actually, the make-up of the Commission and its staff was an excellent safeguard against over-commitment to any one theory, or against the illicit transformation of probabilities into certainties.

e. Oswald would not have been any sensible person's choice for a co-conspirator. He was a "loner," mixed up, of questionable reliability and an unknown quantity to any professional intelligence service. (Archivist's note: This claim is demonstrably untrue with the latest file releases. The CIA had an operational interest in Oswald less than a month before the assassination. Source: Oswald and the CIA, John Newman and newly released files from the National Archives.)

f. As to charges that the Commission's report was a rush job, it emerged three months after the deadline originally set. But to the degree that the Commission tried to speed up its reporting, this was largely due to the pressure of irresponsible speculation already appearing, in some cases coming from the same critics who, refusing to admit their errors, are now putting out new criticisms.

g. Such vague accusations as that "more than ten people have died mysteriously" can always be explained in some natural way e.g.: the individuals concerned have for the most part died of natural causes; the Commission staff questioned 418 witnesses (the FBI interviewed far more people, conduction 25,000 interviews and re interviews), and in such a large group, a certain number of deaths are to be expected. (When Penn Jones, one of the originators of the "ten mysterious deaths" line, appeared on television, it emerged that two of the deaths on his list were from heart attacks, one from cancer, one was from a head-on collision on a bridge, and one occurred when a driver drifted into a bridge abutment.)


5. Where possible, counter speculation by encouraging reference to the Commission's Report itself. Open-minded foreign readers should still be impressed by the care, thoroughness, objectivity and speed with which the Commission worked. Reviewers of other books might be encouraged to add to their account the idea that, checking back with the report itself, they found it far superior to the work of its critics.

SOURCE

Know your BFEE: Lies are the Currency of their Realm

"He who controls the past, controls the future; and he who controls the present, controls the past." – George Orwell, “1984,” Motto of the Ministry of Truth.

That’s why TRUTH matters. That’s why History matters. That’s why DU and DUers who give a damn matter.

Now more than ever, our nation needs the Truth -- the facts about Bush, about the BFEE, about what they’re doing. And what they’ve done.



Here’s one thing to remember: The BFEE and their supporters have worked long and hard to discredit the Kennedys and their supporters at every opportunity.

Case in point: President John F. Kennedy and his decision to avoid war in southeast Asia.

So, the BFEE have done all they can to rewrite government records to make the Kennedy’s look bad. They use television, newspapers, books to shape public awareness and form a negative impression of the Kennedys.

“Make them forget that fellah.”

Here’s why: Kennedy not only was a Liberal. He was a Liberal Democrat who wanted to use the full power of government to make a better nation for ALL Americans. A veteran and war hero, JFK wanted to avoid WWIII and did all he could to preserve the peace. JFK believed in the power of the United States to make this a better world for ALL people.

That’s pretty red-white-and-blue stuff, eh? Members of the BFEE hate it all. First, social programs cost them money. Second, open discussion of the truth costs them power. Third, a fully functioning democracy denies them status.



“Former” CIA operative and Bay of Pigs veteran E. Howard Hunt was hired into the Nixon White House to plug leaks. As part of his job description, before he got busted for his role in the Watergate break-in, Hunt was given the job to change the historical record to reflect that President Kennedy had ordered the assassination of South Vietnamese president Diem. So, Hunt forged a couple of documents:





Nice, work, E. Howard. But he wasn’t alone. Others in the government had been hard at work pinning the murder of Diem on the innocent JFK. Gen. Edward Lansdale, for instance:





The Spider's Fodder Units.





Here’s where things get really BFEE-ish. Averell Harriman, business associate of Prescott Bush (a Senator, father and grandfather to the two presidents Bush), appears to have acted as the catalyst for America’s involvement in the disastrous Vietnam War. One wouldn’t know it from reading the official and officially and unofficially sanctioned histories, but Harriman seems to be the guy who OK'd the assassination of Diem:



WHY GO THROUGH ALL THIS BOTHER?

TO BLAME JFK FOR VIETNAM.



Check out Nixon’s own words, courtesy of the White House audio taping system:



Gee. Nixon. Bush. Hunt. Harriman.

Here’s a stunner. Hunt worked as “press secretary” to Harriman in Paris after WW II. Before then? Harriman worked with Prescott Bush and Allen Dulles in arming Hitler.

For the BFEE, lies are a medium of exchange. And the bigger the lie, the more they can exchange -- read: "Steal." In America, they've stole Treasury. Justice. Defense. Democracy. Your Future.



Jebthro in '08!

Small world. Big wars.

AMERICA’S PSYCHO

The Nazi Connection to the JFK Assassination

By Mae Brussell

EXCERPT...

In A Study of a Master Spy, published in London in 196l, Bob Edwards, a member of Parliament and Kenneth Dunne, presented documentary evidence that Allen Dulles of the CIA carried on secret conferences with representatives of Hitler's SS Security Office in February and March 1943. They learned that "Official Washington knew Martin Bormann, Deputy Fuhrer of Hitler's Germany, master-minded the international 'Die Spirule' (Spider) underground organization which is planning to revive nazism as soon as West Germany is adequately rearmed by the United States. Official Washington seems disinterested."

With John J. McCloy, Allen Dulles and J. Edgar Hoover in control of the Kennedy assassination investigation, these nazi connections were buried.

http://www.ctrl.org/essay2/NCTJFKA.html

"Spider's Web": The Secret History of How the United States Illegally Armed Saddam Hussein; a Conversation with the Journalist Who Broke the Iraqgate Scandal That Involved President George Bush, James Baker and Donald Rumsfeld

EXCERPT...

With Iraqi President Saddam Hussein insisting that Iraq no longer has weapons of mass destruction we are going to spend the rest of the hour looking at how the United States helped illegally arm Iraq in the 1980s.
It was a scandal that took on Tom Clancy-like proportions: It involved a president, George Bush the First; future Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld; the current FBI head Robert Mueller and, in a minor role, even Henry Kissinger.

Over 10 years ago a reporter for the Financial Times named Alan Friedman uncovered the shocking story. He revealed that:

President Bush and Secretary of State James Baker had committed billions of taxpayer dollars to assist Saddam Hussein.
Bush and Baker allowed the export of U.S. technology that would directly help Baghdad build a massive arsenal of chemical, biological and possibly nuclear weapons. The arms were given to help Iraq fight Iran.
The CIA helped orchestrated illegal arms deals that involved Pinochet supporters in Chile, the apartheid regime in South Africa as well as most of the major NATO allies in Europe.

CONTINUED w/Interview Link

http://www.democracynow.org/article.pl?sid=03/04/07/0312256

Saddam key in early CIA plot

By Richard Sale
UPI Intelligence Correspondent
Published 4/10/2003 7:30 PM

U.S. forces in Baghdad might now be searching high and low for Iraqi dictator Saddam Hussein, but in the past Saddam was seen by U.S. intelligence services as a bulwark of anti-communism and they used him as their instrument for more than 40 years, according to former U.S. intelligence diplomats and intelligence officials.

United Press International has interviewed almost a dozen former U.S. diplomats, British scholars and former U.S. intelligence officials to piece together the following account. The CIA declined to comment on the report.
While many have thought that Saddam first became involved with U.S. intelligence agencies at the start of the September 1980 Iran-Iraq war, his first contacts with U.S. officials date back to 1959, when he was part of a CIA-authorized six-man squad tasked with assassinating then Iraqi Prime Minister Gen. Abd al-Karim Qasim.

SNIP...

Little attention was paid to Qasim's bloody and conspiratorial regime until his sudden decision to withdraw from the pact in 1959, an act that "freaked everybody out" according to a former senior U.S. State Department official.
Washington watched in marked dismay as Qasim began to buy arms from the Soviet Union and put his own domestic communists into ministry positions of "real power," according to this official. The domestic instability of the country prompted CIA Director Allan Dulles to say publicly that Iraq was "the most dangerous spot in the world."

In the mid-1980s, Miles Copeland, a veteran CIA operative, told UPI the CIA had enjoyed "close ties" with Qasim's ruling Baath Party, just as it had close connections with the intelligence service of Egyptian leader Gamel Abd Nassar. In a recent public statement, Roger Morris, a former National Security Council staffer in the 1970s, confirmed this claim, saying that the CIA had chosen the authoritarian and anti-communist Baath Party "as its instrument."

CONTINUED…

http://www.upi.com/view.cfm?StoryID=20030410-070214-6557r

HON. TOM LANTOS

in the House of Representatives

TUESDAY, MAY 19, 1992

* Mr. LANTOS. Mr. Speaker, just 1 year ago, Americans were flush with the glow of the military victory over Saddam Hussein. Parades were held in the largest of cities and in the smallest of hamlets. New York and Washington were trying to outdo each other in the splendor of their competing celebrations of victory.


* This year, however, we are wallowing in the sordid aftermath of the revelations of the misguided administration policy that brought about that war. We have been treated to details of how the administration bent over backwards in its misguided effort to support the regime of Saddam Hussein on the very eve of the Iraqi invasion of Kuwait.


* Mr. Speaker, William Safire summarized this squalid tale of policy run amuck in an excellent article that appeared in yesterday's issue of the New York Times. I ask that this article be placed in the Record, and I urge my colleagues to read it carefully.

(How the U.S. Armed Iraq)

(BY WILLIAM SAFIRE)

Washington: Americans now know that the war in the Persian Gulf was brought about by a colossal foreign-policy blunder: George Bush's decision, after the Iran-Iraq war ended, to entrust regional security to Saddam Hussein.

What is not yet widely understood is how that benighted policy led to the Bush Administration's fraudulent use of public funds, its sustained deception of Congress and its obstruction of justice.

As the Saudi Ambassador, Prince Bandar, was urging Mr. Bush and Mr. Baker to buy the friendship of the Iraqi dictator in August 1989, the F.B.I. uncovered a huge scam at the Atlanta branch of the Lavoro Bank to finance the buildup of Iraq's war machine by diverting U.S.-guaranteed grain loans.

Instead of pressing the investigation or curbing the appeasement, the President turned a blind eye to lawbreaking and directed another billion dollars to Iraq. Our State and Agriculture Department's complicity in Iraq's duplicity transformed what could have been dealt with as `Saddam's Lavoro scandal' into George Bush's Iraqgate.

The first element of corruption is the wrongful application of U.S. credit guarantees. Neither the Commodity Credit Corporation nor the Export-Import Bank runs a foreign-aid program; their purpose is to stimulate U.S. exports. High-risk loan guarantees to achieve foreign-policy goals unlawful endanger that purpose.

Yet we now know that George Bush personally leaned on Ex-Im to subvert its charter--not to promote our exports but to promote relations with the dictator. And we have evidence that James Baker overrode worries in Agriculture and O.M.B. that the law was being perverted: Mr. Baker's closest aid, Robert Kimmett, wrote triumphantly, `your call to . . . Yeutter . . . paid off.' Former Agriculture Secretary Clayton Yeutter is now under White House protection.

Second element of corruption is the misleading of Congress. When the charge was made two years ago in this space that State was improperly intervening in this case, Mr. Baker's top Middle East aide denied it to Senate Foreign Relations; meanwhile, Yeutter aides deceived Senator Leahy's Agriculture Committee about the real foreign-policy purpose of the C.C.C. guarantees. To carry out Mr. Bush's infamous National Security Directive 26, lawful oversight was systematically blinded.

Third area of Iraqgate corruption is the obstruction of justice. Atlanta's assistant U.S. Attorney Gail McKenzie, long blamed here for foot-dragging, would not withhold from a grand jury what she has already told friends: that indictment of Lavoro officials was held up for nearly a year by the Bush Criminal Division. The long delay in prosecution enabled James Baker to shake credits for Saddam out of malfeasant Agriculture appointees.

When House Banking Chairman Henry Gonzalez gathered documents marked `secret' showing this pattern of corruption, he put them in the Congressional Record. Two months later, as the media awakened, Mr. Bush gave the familiar `gate' order; stonewall.

`Public disclosure of classified information harms the national security,' Attorney General William Barr instructed the House Banking Committee last week. `. . . in light of your recent disclosures, the executive branch will not provide any more classified information'--unless the wrongdoing is kept secret.

`Your threat to withhold documents,' responded Chairman Gonzalez, `has all the earmarks of a classic effort to obstruct a proper and legitimate investigation . . . none of the documents compromise, in any fashion whatsoever, the national security or intelligence sources and methods.'

Mr. Barr, in personal jeopardy, has flung down the gauntlet. Chairman Gonzalez tells me he plans to present his obstruction case this week to House Judiciary Chairman Jack Brooks, probably flanked by Representatives Charles Schumer and Barney Frank, members of both committees.

`I will recommend that Judiciary consider requiring the appointment of an independent counsel,' says Mr. Gonzalez, who has been given reason to believe that Judiciary--capable of triggering the Ethics in Government Act--will be persuaded to act.

Policy blunders are not crimes. But perverting the purpose of appropriated funds is a crime; lying to Congress compounds that crime; and obstructing justice to cover up the original crime is a criminal conspiracy.

SOURCE:

http://www.fas.org/spp/starwars/congress/1992/h920519l.htm

Recovered History: BCCI – BNL - Kissinger – Bush & Iraq

CHRIS FLOYD, COUNTERSPIN

- The opening of a long-delayed civil suit in a . . . involves our old friends, BCCI, the international bank that served as the front for a global crime ring involving top officials and Establishment worthies in dozens of "civilized" nations. BCCI ran guns to Saddam and other heavies, funded Pakistan's illegal nuclear weapons program, laundered drug profits, peddled prostitutes, doled out bribes, served as a conduit for covert CIA operations--and, through its connections to the bin Laden family, gave George W. Bush a sweetheart loan of $25 million to bail out one of his many business failures.

One of the respectable organizations tainted by the ring was the Bank of England, which was the financial regulator for BCCI when the front finally collapsed in 1991--leaving its legitimate creditors some $11 billion in the hole. Not surprisingly, some of these victims filed suit against ye olde B of E, claiming that its oversight of BCCI left something to be desired. But successive British governments--including the plagiaristic poodle-led pack currently in power--have fought for years to quash the lawsuit, the Observer reports.

That's because the trial could open a can of particularly grubby worms concerning the UK government's extensive canoodling with BCCI. A host of worthies are expected to be grilled in the dock, including John Major, former UK prime minister and current business partner of George Bush I in yet another secretive international front that profits from war, weapons, violence, repression and the greasing of highly-placed palms: the Carlyle Group. . .

The Italian bank BNL was one of BCCI's main tentacles. BNL's Atlanta branch was the primary funnel used by the first Bush Administration to send millions of secret dollars to Saddam for arms purchases, including deadly chemicals and other WMD materials supplied by the Chilean arms dealer Cardoen and various politically-connected operators in the United States like, weapons merchant Matrix Churchill. (As always with the Busha Nostra, geopolitics--in this case, helping Saddam wage aggressive war against Iran--and crony profits go hand in hand. Once the war was over and Iran was left a shattered hulk, with millions dead and displaced, the useful idiot Saddam was expendable, swiftly morphing from good buddy into budding Hitler.)

CONTINUED…

http://www.scoop.co.nz/stories/HL0302/S00119.htm

Saddam Could Call CIA in His Defense

by Sanjay Suri
Published on Saturday, July 3, 2004 by the Inter Press Service

LONDON - Evidence offered by a top CIA man could confirm the testimony given by Saddam Hussein at the opening of his trial in Baghdad Thursday that he knew of the Halabja massacre only from the newspapers.

Thousands were reported killed in the gassing of Iraqi Kurds in Halabja in the north of Iraq in March 1988 towards the end of Iraq's eight-year war with Iran. The gassing of the Kurds has long been held to be the work of Ali Hassan al-Majid, named in the West because of that association as 'Chemical Ali'. Saddam Hussein is widely alleged to have ordered Ali to carry out the chemical attack.

SNIP...

A report prepared by the top CIA official handling the matter says Saddam Hussein was not responsible for the massacre, and indicates that it was the work of Iranians. Further, the Scott inquiry on the role of the British government has gathered evidence that following the massacre the United States in fact armed Saddam Hussein to counter the Iranians chemicals for chemicals.

SNIP…

The CIA officer Stephen C. Pelletiere was the agency's senior political analyst on Iraq during the Iran-Iraq war. As professor at the Army War College from 1988 to 2000, he says he was privy to much of the classified material that flowed through Washington having to do with the Persian Gulf.

SNIP…

Soon after the attack, the United States approved the export to Iraq of virus cultures and a billion-dollar contract to design and build a petrochemical plant the Iraqis planned to use to produce mustard gas.

CONTINUED…

http://www.commondreams.org/headlines04/0703-01.htm

Livermore Scientists Reignite JFK Assassination Debate

POSTED: 9:04 am PDT August 21, 2006
UPDATED: 9:29 am PDT August 21, 2006

LIVERMORE -- It's been the subject of numerous arguments, books and a major Hollywood movie and now scientists at Lawrence Livermore Laboratory have turned up the heat again on just who assassinated President John F. Kennedy.

The researchers say metallurgical chemical "fingerprints" on the bullets that killed the president and wounded then Texas Governor John Connally may have been misinterpreted and that the government's crucial "single gunman theory" has been thrown into doubt.

"It basically shatters what some people call the best physical evidence around," chemist Pat Grant, director of the lab's highly respected Forensic Science Center told the San Jose Mercury News.

Grant and Lab metallurgist Erik Randich found that the chemical "fingerprints" used to identify which bullets the fragments came from were not quite the "smoking gun" as thought pointing to Lee Harvey Oswald as the lone gunman.

The FBI used five bullet fragments recovered from the limousine, Connally's body, the president's brain and from a stretcher for its initial tests using what is known as "neutron activation" analysis.

CONTINUED...

http://www.ktvu.com/news/9709821/detail.html

A hand held out to Beijing: US policy after Tiananmen Square

By James Conachy
15 July 1999

Censored US State Department documents from 1985-1989, obtained under Freedom of Information legislation and now published on the Internet, provide a damning indictment of the conduct of the Republican administration of President George Bush in the aftermath of the Tiananmen Square massacre.

The documents prove that the US government was not concerned with the suppression of the Chinese working class, but the possibility that it may cause disruptions to the political, military and economic relations developed with the Beijing regime since 1971.

In the days immediately following the military assault on the capital, with virtually every urban centre of China convulsed with protests and demonstrations, US officials were preoccupied with trying to assess whether Deng Xiaoping would get away with the military crackdown or whether it had aggravated the social and political tensions in China to the point of civil war.

Cables and summaries on June 6 itself are dominated by reports, later to be downplayed, that fighting was breaking out between the 27th Army deployed by Deng Xiaoping into Beijing and other military units sympathetic to the students and workers. A summary prepared for the US Secretary of State refers to the Chinese government and military heads as feeling like “they are fighting for their lives” and surrounding their residences with armoured vehicles and troops.

From June 9, following the first public appearance and a speech by Deng Xiaoping, the US officials became convinced that the regime would survive and Washington responded accordingly.

CONTINUED...

http://www.wsws.org/articles/1999/jul1999/usch-j15.shtml

'Fascism' Frame Set Up
by Neocon Press

By Jim Lobe
Inter Press Service
9-2-6

The aggressive new campaign by the administration of President George W. Bush to depict U.S. foes in the Middle East as "fascists" and its domestic critics as "appeasers" owes a great deal to steadily intensifying efforts by the right-wing press over the past several months to draw the same comparison.

The Rupert Murdoch-owned Fox News Network and The Weekly Standard, as well as the Washington Times, which is controlled by the Rev. Sun Myung Moon's Unification Church, and the neoconservative New York Sun, have consistently and with increasing frequency framed the challenges faced by Washington in the region in the context of the rise of fascism and Nazism in the 1930s, according to a search of the Nexis database by IPS.

All of those outlets, as well as two other right-wing U.S. magazines - The National Review and The American Spectator - far outpaced their commercial rivals in the frequency of their use of key words and names, such as "appeasement," "fascism," and "Hitler," particularly with respect to Iran and its controversial president, Mahmoud Ahmadinejad.

Nexis, for example, cited 56 uses of "Islamofascist" or "Islamofascism" in separate programs or segments aired by Fox News compared with 24 by CNN over the past year. Even more striking, the same terms were used in 115 different articles or columns in the Washington Times, compared with only eight in the Washington Post over the same period, according to a breakdown by Nexis.

Similarly, the Washington Times used the words "appease" or "appeasement" - a derogatory reference to efforts by British Prime Minister Neville Chamberlain to avoid war with Nazi Germany before the latter's invasion of Poland - in 25 different articles or columns that dealt with alleged threats posed by Ahmadinejad, compared to six in the Post and only three in the New York Times.

CONTINUED...

http://www.infoshop.org/inews/article.php?story=2006090111065159

Hate: George Lincoln Rockwell and the American Nazi Party

(388 pp with photos. Published by Brassey's, Washington, London, 1999)
William H. Schmalz (author)
A Commentary and Review

Introduction

Some Hateful Ideas
And Their Legacy in the Conservative Right*

EXCERPT...

A Dramatic Shift to the Conservative Right in America

Since the end of WWII, but especially over the last 35 years or so, the political landscape in the U.S. --as well as other parts of the world--has shifted dramatically to the Conservative Right. That shift has largely gone unnoticed by those not old enough or not historically sensitive enough to place the Conservative Right political ideology and agenda in historical perspective. Many do not realize that the inherently racist, homophobic, and misogynist ideology now passed off by some Conservative Right politicians such as George W. Bush as acceptable and even respectable, was part of the reason the U.S. entered WW II. Millions of American soldiers died fighting against that hateful ideology that many on the Conservative Right‹in varying degrees-- are now trumpeting as a kind of "final solution" to socioeconomic and other problems they claim have been created by the U.S. Government and by the "Liberals" of the 1960's.

Certainly, American G.I.s returning from the ravages left by Hitler's Third Reich at the end of WWII probably could not have conceived the possibility that the United States might one day have its own Nazi Party. But in the 1950's, while the world was still coming to terms with the Holocaust and fighting Cold War Communism, George Lincoln Rockwell, born March 9, 1918 in Bloomington, Illinois, was engendering the idea of the American Nazi Party (ANP).

From the late 1950's until his death in 1967, Rockwell became the seminal force of post-World War II National Socialism (Nazism) in America and the originator of the "Holocaust Denial" movement. That movement, institutionalized in various neo-Nazi organizations such as the so-called "Committee on the Open Debate on the Holocaust" (CODOH) is so rampant today across the United States that many college-age and younger unquestioningly accept its fundamental thesis, that the Holocaust is a Jewish lie.

William H. Schmaltz's Hate: George Lincoln Rockwell and the American Nazi Party is an excellent, well-researched book on Rockwell's American Nazi Party (ANP) and its legacy to Conservatives in the United States. He has documented the historic development of this Conservative Right organization and its leader, who would otherwise be (and was, by some) dismissed as a "half-penny" Hitler. Through numerous interviews with many of the original ANP "Stormtroopers" of Rockwell's Party, and much research from the FBI and other original sources, Schmaltz traced the persistence of Rockwell and his supporters to establish the ANP over many financial, political, and legal obstacles, from 1958 through 1967.

Most importantly, Schmaltz provides us with an invaluable overview of the American Nazi Party's evolution to its present forms, the Christian Identity movement, Aryan Nations, and the Order. Certain of Rockwell's original Stormtroopers, such as William Peirce, head of the neo-Nazi National Alliance, have carried forward the Nazi creed and agenda of Rockwell's ANP. The last part of the book, the Epilogue, provides a very useful summary of that evolution and development, as well as an outline of the similarities and differences between the Conservatives of Rockwell's time and present-day Conservatives of the 1980's and 1990's.

CONTINUED...

http://www.feminista.com/archives/v3n10/estep.html

The dunce

His former Harvard Business School professor recalls George W. Bush not just as a terrible student but as spoiled, loutish and a pathological liar.

By Mary Jacoby

September 16, 2004 -- For 25 years, Yoshi Tsurumi, one of George W. Bush's professors at Harvard Business School, was content with his green-card status as a permanent legal resident of the United States. But Bush's ascension to the presidency in 2001 prompted the Japanese native to secure his American citizenship. The reason: to be able to speak out with the full authority of citizenship about why he believes Bush lacks the character and intellect to lead the world's oldest and most powerful democracy.

"I don't remember all the students in detail unless I'm prompted by something," Tsurumi said in a telephone interview Wednesday. "But I always remember two types of students. One is the very excellent student, the type as a professor you feel honored to be working with. Someone with strong social values, compassion and intellect -- the very rare person you never forget. And then you remember students like George Bush, those who are totally the opposite."

The future president was one of 85 first-year MBA students in Tsurumi's macroeconomic policies and international business class in the fall of 1973 and spring of 1974. Tsurumi was a visiting associate professor at Harvard Business School from January 1972 to August 1976; today, he is a professor of international business at Baruch College in New York.

Trading as usual on his father's connections, Bush entered Harvard in 1973 for a two-year program. He'd just come off what George H.W. Bush had once called his eldest son's "nomadic years" -- partying, drifting from job to job, working on political campaigns in Florida and Alabama and, most famously, apparently not showing up for duty in the Alabama National Guard.

SNIP...

Bush, by contrast, "was totally the opposite of Chris Cox," Tsurumi said. "He showed pathological lying habits and was in denial when challenged on his prejudices and biases. He would even deny saying something he just said 30 seconds ago. He was famous for that. Students jumped on him; I challenged him." When asked to explain a particular comment, said Tsurumi, Bush would respond, "Oh, I never said that." A White House spokeswoman did not return a phone call seeking comment.

CONTINUED...

http://dir.salon.com/story/news/feature/2004/09/16/tsurumi/index.html

Our Hidden WMD Program

Why Bush is spending so much on nuclear weapons.

By Fred Kaplan
Slate
Posted Friday, April 23, 2004, at 6:41 PM ET

The budget is busted; American soldiers need more armor; they're running out of supplies. Yet the Department of Energy is spending an astonishing $6.5 billion on nuclear weapons this year, and President Bush is requesting $6.8 billion more for next year and a total of $30 billion over the following four years. This does not include his much-cherished missile-defense program, by the way. This is simply for the maintenance, modernization, development, and production of nuclear bombs and warheads.

Measured in "real dollars" (that is, adjusting for inflation), this year's spending on nuclear activities is equal to what Ronald Reagan spent at the height of the U.S.-Soviet standoff. It exceeds by over 50 percent the average annual sum ($4.2 billion) that the United States spent—again, in real dollars—throughout the four and a half decades of the Cold War.

There is no nuclear arms race going on now. The world no longer offers many suitable nuclear targets. President Bush is trying to persuade other nations—especially "rogue regimes"—to forgo their nuclear ambitions. Yet he is shoveling money to U.S. nuclear weapons laboratories as if the Soviet Union still existed and the Cold War still raged.

These are the findings of a virtually unnoticed report written by weapons analyst Christopher Paine, based on data from official budget documents, and released earlier this month by the Natural Resources Defense Council.

The report raises anew a question that always springs to mind after a close look at the U.S. military budget: What the hell is going on here? Specifically: Do we really need to be spending this kind of money on nuclear weapons? What role do nuclear weapons play in 21st-century military policy? How many weapons do we need, to deter what sort of attack or to hit what sorts of targets, with what level of confidence, for what strategic and tactical purposes?

These are questions that haven't been seriously addressed in this country for 30 years. It may be time for a new look.

CONTINUED...

http://www.slate.com/id/2099425/

Bush's Nuclear Revolution: A Regime Change in Nonproliferation

By George Perkovich
From Foreign Affairs, March/April 2003

Summary: The White House's radical new strategy to combat the spread of weapons of mass destruction will likely make the world less secure, not more.

George Perkovich is Vice President for Studies at the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace and author of India's Nuclear Bomb.

ARTICLE:

http://www.foreignaffairs.org/20030301facomment10334/george-perkovich/bush-s-nuclear-revolution-a-regime-change-in-nonproliferation.html

The Bush Family Connection to the Nazis

EXCERPT...

1933:On January 4, 1933, Hitler was invited to the Schroeder Bank by a group of industrialists. The industrialists gave Hitler the money to overcome his financial problems in turn for a pledge to break the trade unions. Present at this meeting were two Americans John Foster Dulles and Allen Dulles.

Hitler assumes power.

Max Warburg selected by Prescott Bush to be the American Ship & Commerce Line official representative on the board of the Hamburg- Amerika Line. Warburg was a long time advisor of Hjalmar Schacht, the Nazi’s Economic Minister and an executive in the Reichsbank. Warburg was also a close friend with Montagu Collet Norman.

An agreement to coordinate all trade between Germany & America was reached in Berlin after negotiations between Hitler’s Economics Minister, Hjalmar Schacht & John Foster Dulles.As a result Oliver Harriman, Averell’s cousin formed a syndicate of 150 firms to conduct all business between Germany and the United States.

North German Lloyd Co. merged with Hamburg-Amerika Line in Hamburg. Christian Beck a long time Harriman executive was placed as manager of ‘freight & operations’ in North America for this newly merged company. Emil Helfferich, an ardent Nazi was appointed chairman of this new company called Hapag-Lloyd. Nazi security guards were now on all ships of the company.

William S. Farish was appointed chairman of Standard Oil by John D. Rockefeller. Farish was close friends with Hermann Schmitz, chairman of I.G. Farben. Farish hired Ivy Lee, to write pro-I.G. Farben and pro-Nazi propaganda and get it into the U.S. press. He hired Nazi German crews for Standard Oil tankers. In addition, he hired "Emil Helfferich," chairman of the Hamburg-Amerika Line, as chairman also of the Standard Oil Company subsidiary in Germany. Karl Lindemann, board member of Hamburg-Amerika, also became a top Farish-Standard executive in Germany. The interlock placed Farish and Prescott Bush in a small group of Hitler supporters. Both Emil Helfferich and Karl Lindemann were authorized to write checks to Heinrich Himmler, chief of the Nazi SS, on a special Standard Oil account. This account was managed by the German-British-American banker, Kurt von Schroeder. According to U.S. intelligence documents reviewed by author Anthony Sutton, Helfferich continued his payments to the SS into 1944, when the SS was supervising the mass murder at the Standard-I.G. Farben

Auschwitz and other death camps. Helfferich told Allied interrogators after the war that these were not his personal contributions-they were corporate Standard Oil funds.

SOURCE:

http://www.country-liberal-party.com/pages/Bush-Nazi-links.htm

The Congressional committee report confirmed Butler's testimony:

In the last few weeks of the committee's official life it received evidence showing that certain persons had made an attempt to establish a fascist government in this country.

No evidence was presented and this committee had none to show a connection between this effort and any fascist activity of any European country.

There is no question that these attempts were discussed, were planned, and might have been placed in execution when and if the financial backers deemed it expedient.

This committee received evidence from Maj. Gen Smedley D. Butler (retired), twice decorated by the Congress of the United States. He testified before the committee as to conversations with one Gerald C. MacGuire in which the latter is alleged to have suggested the formation of a fascist army under the leadership of General Butler.(20)

MacGuire denied these allegations under oath, but your committee was able to verify all the pertinent statements made by General Butler, with the exception of the direct statement suggesting the creation of the organization. This, however, was corroborated in the correspondence of MacGuire with his principal, Robert Sterling Clark, of New York City, while MacGuire was abroad studying the various forms of veterans organizations of Fascist character.(21)

Even though the Senate committee did take the threat seriously and did verify that a fascist coup was indeed well past the planning stage, the Senate committee expired.

Falluja: America's Guernica

Fallujah : America's Guernica
by
Hector Carreon
La Voz de Aztlan

EXCERPT...

"Guernica" is back. This time it is not about the Nazi Luftwaffe dropping bombs on a village in Spain but about the USA dropping bombs and massacring hundreds of civilians that include women and children in the town of Fallujah, Iraq. As Franco in "Guernica", the USA military is denying that it is targeting civilians, but censored reports are filtering out of Iraq that say that over half of the Mosques in the city lie in ruins and that US Marines are utilizing outlawed lethal gasses against the city's defenders which are also causing massive casualties among the civilians that remain in the city. Other reports in the Arab media talk about hundreds of civilian casualties under the rubble of homes that were hit by USA bombs during the initial military "softening" of the city. Gruesome photographs of the dead are reminiscent of the survivor's account of "Guernica" as quoted above.

It is ironic that in February 5th of 2003, when Secretary of State Colin Powell was making a call for war against Iraq before the United Nations Security Council in New York City, that the copy of Picasso's "Guernica" on the second floor of the UN building was "covered" with a large drape. Just 24 hours after Powell failed to convinced the doubtful U.N. Security Council members, President George W. Bush declared "The game is over" and launched the brutal Zionist inspired "Shock and Awe" attack against Iraq. The number of Iraqi civilians that have been blown to pieces by USA bombs and missiles since then are still being counted.

Fallujah today is America's Guernica and the USA media is covering up the criminal murderous military operation under way. In addition there is absolutely no outcry from the USA political establishment. This points to a deep spiritual and moral malaise among Americans and decay in the leadership of the USA.

The media is not raising any objections to the war crimes in Fallujah but instead make the savage military operations as if they were normal. The media reports conceal from Americans the true character of the vicious military assault which is to destroy a significant source of opposition to the USA colonialist occupation and its puppet regime.

Like Generalisimo Franco in Guernica, Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld is lying to the American public about the number of Iraqi civilian casualties in Fallujah. There are about 30,000 civilians left in Fallujah and many of these have already been killed. The rest are "fair" targets in the house to house US Marine assaults. It will take months if not years to determine the extent of the civilian massacre.

CONTINUED...WARNING: GRAPHIC IMAGES THAT WILL HAUNT GOOD PEOPLE....

http://www.aztlan.net/fallujah_guernica.htm

THE NAZI CONNECTION:
EUGENICS, AMERICAN RACISM, AND GERMAN NATIONAL SOCIALISM

By Stefan Kuhl
Oxford University Press, New York,
1994, xviii + 166 pp.

Reviewed by
David Lethbridge

EXCERPT...

The central theme in Kuhl' s book is the intimate relations between American eugenicists and Nazi racial scientists during the period of classical fascism. Eugenics - a term invented by Francis Gaiton that refers to ensuring "the more suitable races or strains of blood a better chance of prevailing speedily over the less suitable" - had from its beginning in America, a political orientation. Wealthy individuals from within the highest levels of the American exploiting class funneled hundreds of thousands of dollars into the eugenics movement. Laws were implemented in state legislatures to prevent the procreation of "inferior families:" At the federal level, legislation was passed to restrict immigration to largely "Nordic" populations. American scientists stated the racist position publicly. The eugenicist Charles Woodruff declared, "It is clear that the types of human beings from northwest Europe are our best citizens and have, therefore, to be conserved;" while the sociologist Edward Ross, in a phrase now used repeatedly by contemporary neo-Nazis, spoke of the "race suicide" that would result from "inferior" segments of the population gaining power. By the early 1930s, the American eugenics movement was the most influential and prestigious among those Western capitalist powers who were interested in genetic and racial manipulation. Nor was this fact lost on the rising Nazi movement; even Hitler, in "Mein Kampf", wrote admiringly of the US Immigration Restriction Act with its intended purpose of ranking "races" according to their genetic "suitability."

What Kuhl has succeeded in doing, in this masterful book, is to sketch in telling detail the cross-currents of influence between the American-dominated eugenics movement, and the rise and implementation of the Nazi racial program; In 1934, for example, some eighteen months after the Nazis came to power, Falk Ruttke, a member of both Hitler's elite SS and the Committee for Population and Race Policies, spoke at an international meeting of eugenicists in Zurich. Ruttke thoroughly outlined the steps the Nazis had already taken toward rebuilding Germany along racial lines. These included the infamous Law on Preventing Hereditarily Ill Progeny which allowed for the sterilization, and ultimately the gassing, of persons with mental or physical afflictions and the Decree for the Granting of Marriage Loans, which explicitly excluded Jews. The US Journal of Heredity appreciatively reported Ruttke' s speech as reflecting the eugenic foundation of the Nazi state. Even more to the point, Kuhl recounts how Clarence G. Campbell senior member of the American contingent at the 1935 eugenics conference in Berlin, praised Hitler's race policies in glowing terms, referring to them as "epochal in racial history", and as setting a pattern "which other nations and racial groups must follow." In Germany, his remarks were widely published as particularly valuable propaganda. Back in the US, Campbell busied himself drumming up support for the Nazi regime.

Throughout the pre-war period, there was considerable influence of American eugenics policy on Nazi racial policy. Kuhl notes that specific Nazi legislation on sterilization was based on similar American laws, or on model legislation proposed by Harry Laughlin of the Eugenics Record Office, and that US scientists were proud of their influence on the Hitler regime. German publishing houses eagerly reprinted American racial and eugenics books and articles, while American foundations such as the Pioneer Fund, underwrote the distribution of Nazi race propaganda films in the US. In an almost incestuous mutuality, the Nazis used the prestige of the American scientists and legislators to validate their own eugenics and racial policies, while American eugenicists used the ne6r Nazi eugenics laws as evidence that widespread human sterilization policies could be feasibly put into practice with a minimum of social resistance.

Even after World War II had begun, notable American eugenicists continued to visit Nazi Germany; such visits were virtual collaborations. Ellinger, a geneticist, met with Wolfgang Abel, a scientist and SS officer, who was active in sterilization programs involving both blacks and Jews.

Returning to the US, Ellinger wrote that the Nazi racial program had nothing to do with religious persecution, characterizing it instead as a "breeding project" designed to eliminate the "hereditary attributes of the Semitic race." At the same time, the anthropologist Lothrop Stoddard was meeting with both Himmler and Hitler. Stoddard himself was a thoroughgoing racist, and author of "The Rising Tide of Color Against White-Supremacy" and other works which are still today being sold by neo-Nazi publication houses. Not only were his writings cited in Nazi school books, but he won the praise of President Hoover during his testimony to the House Immigration Committee. Holocaust deniers, incidentally, should pay particular attention to Stoddard' s claim as early as 1940 - that the "Jews problem" would "soon be settled in fact by the physical elimination of the Jews themselves from the Third Reich." Was this mere wishful thinking on his part, or had he heard of this policy first hand from his meetings with Hitler's high command?

CONTINUED...

http://bethuneinstitute.org/documents/naziconnection.html

Everyone's Loco for the Latino Bush They Call 'P'
Gorgeous George

BY RUSSELL CONTRERAS
August 11, 2000:

A Latino voter registration drive in Aurora, Ill., last month was nothing to write home about -- until George P. Bush mamboed into town and livened things up a bit. As with all the cities he's visited to promote Uncle George W. for president, the son of Florida Gov. Jeb Bush and his Mexican-born wife, Columba, offered the crowd his much-practiced stump speech, filled with fluffy, feel-good rhetoric. "If we don't register and don't vote, national leaders will not be aware of our point of view," the 24-year heir to the Bush dynasty told the crowd of cheering high school students. After the talk, young doe-eyed Hispanic females raced to take photos with the Bush nephew, the one People magazine added to its list of 100 most eligible bachelors. Reporters crowded around the sports-handsome Bush and tossed out some puff questions, while photographers focused their cameras on the guy some GOP boosters call the "Ricky Martin of politics."

SNIP...

'The Little Brown Ones'

One would think that George P. has spent a lifetime extolling his "I'm-Brown-and-Proud" message. That's news to some of his former classmates at Rice University in Houston. There were Hispanic campus groups and events that promoted Latino pride and heritage in his era. But the GOP's new "genie in a bottle" was nowhere among them. More importantly, some of his former Latino classmates remember a rich boy who, in contrast to his current assignment, steered clear of virtually all things Latino.

Ten years before his Rice graduation, George P. and the other grandchildren of the elder George Bush made their first mark on the national scene. Bush, in a presidential race against Democrat Michael Dukakis, was yearning to show off the grandkids to President Ronald Reagan, arriving for the GOP convention in New Orleans. Unaware of the media microphones picking up his comments, Bush pointed the family out to Reagan as he said, "That's Jebby's kids from Florida, the little brown ones."

SOURCE:

http://www.austinchronicle.com/gyrobase/Issue/story?oid=oid%3A78217

Rumsfeld, Iran/Contra, Iraqgate, shaking hands with Saddam

many more questions for those that remember their history, especially hidden history painted black by that broadest of brushes-national security.

http://www.gwu.edu/~nsarchiv/NSAEBB/NSAEBB82/index.htm

http://www.webcom.com/~lpease/collections/hidden/teicher.htm

http://www.rememberjohn.com/talibantexas.html

I wonder what kind of election year show trial we'll see?

Original link:

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_topic&forum=104&topic_id=905194

Gordon Liddy Worships NAZIs

The ex-FBI White House Plumber and Watergate Break-in Convict once bragged about the black-bag jobs he enjoyed doing for "Mr. Hoover," breaking into peoples' offices and homes, threatening and blackmailing lawmakers and judges. All for his conservative cause and Satanic overlords of the Reich. Liddy also bragged of enjoying an intellectual or kultural side, an example of which follows:

Nazi Liddy Wanted to Run ATF, Be Drug Czar

From Edward J. Epstein’s Agency of Fear

… In June, 1971, G. Gordon Liddy, a man possessed with a purpose, ascended to the inner circle of power at the White House. His attempt to take over the thousand-man Alcohol, Tobacco and Firearms enforcement unit of the Treasury Department on behalf of the White House group had been successfully resisted by the Treasury Department earlier that year, and his immediate superior, Eugene Rossides, had moved to ease him out of that department entirely. But Liddy foresaw that the heroin issue could be the very instrument that the White House group needed to consolidate power within the bureaucracy, and thereby extend its police power. To demonstrate how a few determined men could manipulate the emotions of an entire nation by invoking a few highly visual symbols of fear, Liddy invited his new cohorts in the White House to a series of propaganda films being shown in the National Archives that June. The "Inner circle" that Liddy persuaded to view these films included John Ehrlichman, whose Domestic Council 'had assumed by now undisputed control over all domestic issues; Egil Krogh; Donald Santarelli, who was then slated to head the billion-dollar Law Enforcement Assistance Administration (LEAA), which disbursed money to local police departments; Robert Mardian, who headed the internal-security division of the Department of Justice; and a number of Krogh's young assistants on the Domestic Council. The cycle of films was climaxed on June 13 by the showing of Triumph of the Will, a Nazi propaganda film made under the auspices of Hitler and Goering which graphically depicted the way a "national will" could be inculcated into the masses through the agency of controlled fear and frenzied outrage.

Krogh later recalled that he had "considerable apprehension" about hiring Gordon Liddy to work for the White House on the drug program. Rossides had warned him that Liddy was both disloyal and potentially dangerous." Indeed, these were the reasons Rossides tendered for dismissing Liddy from the Treasury Department. Disloyalty to a bureaucracy might mean loyalty to the president, Krogh reasoned. Moreover, given Rossides's record of bureaucratic infighting, Krogh interpreted the potential danger of Liddy as simply his will to act decisively and cut through red tape. Krogh later came to the realization that Liddy had "simply a higher energy level than anyone else" and that therefore he could be extremely persuasive in moving others to action. And as Krogh gradually became persuaded that the drug issue was the best available lever for moving and reorganizing entrenched bureaucracies in the government, Liddy, with his ideas for mobilizing popular support on the drug issue, seemed an "Invaluable addition" to his staff on the Domestic Council.

Continued…

http://edwardjayepstein.com/agency/chap15.htm

Nazi, GOP, big business, Bush Knots

Click on URLs below to access any of sites

An update from
http://www.lifeboatnews.com

Paul Grignon http://www.paulgrignonart.com

100 Links to Bush connections —

The following are links to information about the Bush family, the Bush cabinet appointees and the corporations, think tanks and foundations that are behind the GW Bush administration. My including these links to materials other than the articles I wrote is not to be considered an endorsement of any statement they contain.

These links connect to sites run by the left, the religious right, conservative think tanks, political independents and the mainstream media. Some are pro-Bush and are included for cross reference value. All links were good as of this writing so if you get a message to the contrary keep trying. They are busy sites. When you cut and paste the web addresses or type them in there must be no added spaces or characters or else you will not be able to access the sites. Within each of these sites you can do a word search on Bush or any other word or name that interests you. These materials, which are only a tiny fraction of what’s out there, will help you to see through the blitzkrieg of false information we are all being subject to about GW Bush and his cabinet.

Please forward these links to your friends, the media, elected officials and anyone else with an interest in knowing the real story behind the 43rd President of the United States.


This list was compiled by Robert Lederman, President of A.R.T.I.S.T. (Artists’ Response To Illegal State Tactics) artistpres@aol.com (718) 743-3722
Lederman articles on the Bush connection to Nazis, eugenics and drug companies. Also articles on West Nile Virus, Giuliani, the Manhattan Institute - more than 50 articles filled with references.

http://Baltech.org/lederman/spray /

Unholy Trinity

by Mark Aarons and John Loftus

Sentences used from preface of the book (quote(s)):

(William) Casey was the American end of the Vatican Ratline, and learned how the game was played. In 1980, he became head of the CIA under Reagan.

Beyond doubt, Dulles's most important recruit was a young US Navy officer named Richard M. Nixon, who was plucked from the postwar obscurity of reviewing captured Nazi records to run for Congress, ... ...

(In 1953) as (Eisenhower's) Vice President, Nixon warmly endorsed the "Freedom Fighters" concept, and personally received prominent Fascist fugitives in the White House as potential "liberators" of the captive nations behind the Iron Curtain... ...

The secret techniques used to launder money, guns, and smuggle Nazi "Freedom Fighters" in the 1940s and 1950s were adopted by Reagan/Bush Administration as the covert methodology to avoid Congressional review in the 1980s. In this history of the Cold War, American readers may recognize not only the blueprint for the Iran-Contra scandal, but also the names of many of its architects...

...Oliver North did not invent the money and gunrunning system used in Iran/Contra. He simply copied the one that Casey had used. There was one slight change. Instead of recruiting a Nazi, North hired a terrorist. In North's diary is a reference to "M" who lives in a "fortress-like residence in Marbella, Spain", heavily guarded by the local police. That is the address of Monzer Al-Kassar, chief money launderer for the PLO and a known international terrorist... It was Monzer ("M") who helped North bargain for the release of hostages... ...

...And Vice President Bush? ... ...What did Bush know and when did he know it? The President may have learned about the Ratlines when he was head of CIA. During his brief tenure, there was a nasty incident when Croatian Fascists hijacked an airliner. Yet, when Bush was running for President, his campaign staff listed April 10 as a Croatian holiday -- The day of creation of Croatian Nazi puppet state during World War II. The more things change, the more they stay the same. The same Fascist network introduced into American intelligence in the 1940s is still at work today,... ...

CONTINUED...

http://www.srpska-mreza.com/library/facts/ratline.html

CIA-Nazi Link Grows Clearer as More Documents Come to Light



Nazi war criminal Adolf Eichmann stands trial in Jerusalem in 1961. Apparently, the CIA knew of his whereabouts as early as 1958.

Ron Kampeas
Jewish Telegraphic Agency
WASHINGTON

A former Nazi rose to the highest ranks of a Western intelligence agency - and was a Soviet mole. A lead to Adolf Eichmann was ignored. A spy whose pathological lies made him useless, but who still escaped prosecution for war crimes.

These are among the revelations found among some 8 million pages of documents released here Tuesday that deal with German and Japanese war crimes, including 27,000 pages that detail the relationship after World War II between U.S. government agencies and suspected Nazis war criminals.

The message threading the documents was clear: The price one pays for consorting with evil men far outweighs the return.

"Using very bad people can have very bad consequences," Elizabeth Holtzman, a former U.S. congresswoman and a member of the Interagency Working Group that released the documents, said at a news conference last Tuesday at the National Archives. The group was established in 1999 to declassify rooms full of documents related to Nazi war crimes.

The mandate was later extended to Japanese war crimes.

CONTINUED…

http://www.jewishexponent.com/article/3617/

The CIA and NAZI War Criminals

National Security Archive Posts Secret CIA History
Released Under Nazi War Crimes Disclosure Act

National Security Archive Electronic Briefing Book No. 146

Edited by Tamara Feinstein

February 4, 2005

Washington D.C., February 4, 2005 - Today the National Security Archive posted the CIA's secret documentary history of the U.S government's relationship with General Reinhard Gehlen, the German army's intelligence chief for the Eastern Front during World War II. At the end of the war, Gehlen established a close relationship with the U.S. and successfully maintained his intelligence network (it ultimately became the West German BND) even though he employed numerous former Nazis and known war criminals. The use of Gehlen's group, according to the CIA history, Forging an Intelligence Partnership: CIA and the Origins of the BND, 1945-49, was a "double edged sword" that "boosted the Warsaw Pact's propaganda efforts" and "suffered devastating penetrations by the KGB."

The declassified "SECRET RelGER" two-volume history was compiled by CIA historian Kevin Ruffner and presented in 1999 by CIA Deputy Director for Operations Jack Downing to the German intelligence service (Bundesnachrichtendienst) in remembrance of "the new and close ties" formed during post-war Germany to mark the fiftieth year of CIA-West German cooperation. This history was declassified in 2002 as a result of the work of The Nazi War Crimes and Japanese Imperial Government Records Interagency Working Group (IWG) and contains 97 key documents from various agencies.

This posting comes in the wake of public grievances lodged by members of the IWG that the CIA has not fully complied with the mandate of the Nazi War Crimes Disclosure Act and is continuing to withhold hundreds of thousands of pages of documentation related to their work. (Note 1) In interviews with the New York Times, three public members of the IWG said:

"I think that the CIA has defied the law, and in so doing has also trivialized the Holocaust, thumbed its nose at the survivors of the Holocaust and also at the Americans who gave their lives in the effort to defeat the Nazis in World War II." - Former congresswoman Elizabeth Holtzman

"I can only say that the posture the CIA has taken differs from all the other agencies that have been involved, and that's not a position we can accept." - Washington lawyer Richard Ben-Veniste

"Too much has been secret for too long. The CIA has not complied with the statute." - Former federal prosecutor Thomas H. Baer
The IWG was established in January 11, 1999 and has overseen the declassification of about eight million pages of documents from multiple government agencies. Its mandate expires at the end of March 2005.

CONTINUED w LOADS o' LINKS, PDFs and good, US Government documentation...

http://www.gwu.edu/~nsarchiv/NSAEBB/NSAEBB146/index.htm

CIA's Worst-Kept Secret

By Martin A. Lee
May 16, 2001

"Honest and idealist ... enjoys good food and wine ... unprejudiced mind..."

That's how a 1952 Central Intelligence Agency assessment described Nazi ideologue Emil Augsburg, an officer at the infamous Wannsee Institute, the SS think tank involved in planning the Final Solution. Augsburg's SS unit performed "special duties," a euphemism for exterminating Jews and other "undesirables" during the Second World War.

Although he was wanted in Poland for war crimes, Augsburg managed to ingratiate himself with the U.S. CIA, which employed him in the late 1940s as an expert on Soviet affairs.

Recently released CIA records indicate that Augsburg was among a rogue's gallery of Nazi war criminals recruited by U.S. intelligence shortly after Germany surrendered to the Allies.

Pried loose by Congress, which passed the Nazi War Crimes Disclosure Act three years ago, a long-hidden trove of once-classified CIA documents confirms one of the worst-kept secrets of the Cold War – the CIA's use of an extensive Nazi spy network to wage a clandestine campaign against the Soviet Union.

The CIA reports show that U.S. officials knew they were subsidizing numerous Third Reich veterans who had committed horrible crimes against humanity, but these atrocities were overlooked as the anti-Communist crusade acquired its own momentum. For Nazis who would otherwise have been charged with war crimes, signing on with American intelligence enabled them to avoid a prison term.

"The real winners of the Cold War were Nazi war criminals, many of whom were able to escape justice because the East and West became so rapidly focused after the war on challenging each other," says Eli Rosenbaum, director of the Justice Department's Office of Special Investigations and America's chief Nazi hunter.

CONTINUED...

http://www.consortiumnews.com/2001/051601a.html

Much more...

http://www.consortiumnews.com/archive/nazi.html

The CIA's History Problem is Our History Problem

By David Wallace
Fri Jun 16, 9:22 PM ET

The author David Lowenthal once noted that the "past is a foreign country." The past might be better described as being more like a moving target - always in transition and susceptible (and vulnerable) to becoming unrecognizable to what we once believed. And more often than not new revelations are disorientating and troubling.

EXCERPT…

Such is the case with recent news accounts in the Washington Post and the New York Times that in the late 1950s the CIA knew that Adolf Eichmann was living in Argentina and had a pretty close pseudonym for him (Clemens instead of the actual alias of Klement), but did nothing to bring him to justice. That the CIA sought the cooperation and protection of Nazis, even those guilty of war crimes, after World War Two to serve its Cold War struggles is not news. But the extent of these relationships and the depths the CIA went through to protect them is news. These disclosures have been made possible through the ongoing efforts of the Nazi War Crimes and Japanese Imperial Government Records Interagency Working Group (IWG), launched over eight years ago by the Nazi War Crimes Disclosure Act (Public Law 105-246). The key that unlocked this unsavory history has been the unparalleled access granted to the IWG into formerly secret government records and archives.

Concern over these disclosures extend beyond the sad facts surfaced by the IWG: such as official protection of Nazis residing in the United States and the CIA's post-war use of top Eichmann aides. They also include the entirely unconscionable fact that it has taken generations for the CIA to disclose this information, and only did so after a special act of Congress supplemented by years long battles to protect them from public knowledge. IWG member Thomas H. Baer pointed to such battles when he thanked the CIA for finally coming clean this past week. However, coming clean occurred only after "reversal of policy of thinly veiled noncompliance" with the IWG's legal mandate and the ongoing efforts of members of Congress and (some) IWG members and staff in making an "ironclad case decrying CIAs misinterpretation of its obligations."

Why has the CIA taken so long to open such records and archives? And do the excuses proffered around protecting national security really hold any credible value? I think the answer to the second question must be no, of course not. As to the first question, that is a trickier one, but one must look beyond the legal loopholes that protect secret information for such inordinate periods and look to see what agendas are at play. Clearly one agenda is to provide a simplistic and comforting (and at times woefully inaccurate) past as a means of enabling an ignorant, but strongly held, patriotism as a form of social glue that (kind of) holds society together. But a simplistic and comforting and inaccurate past can only be realized through the unreasonable, though legal, controls granted to the CIA over its historical records and archives. And it is in these seemingly rationally derived controls that the past itself can be held hostage.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/david-wallace/the-cias-history-problem_b_23206.html

Donald Rumsfeld’s Dance with the Nazis

by Frank Rich

EXCERPT...

Here’s how brazen Mr. Rumsfeld was when he invoked Hitler’s appeasers to score his cheap points: Since Hitler was photographed warmly shaking Neville Chamberlain’s hand at Munich in 1938, the only image that comes close to matching it in epochal obsequiousness is the December 1983 photograph of Mr. Rumsfeld himself in Baghdad, warmly shaking the hand of Saddam Hussein in full fascist regalia. Is the defense secretary so self-deluded that he thought no one would remember a picture so easily Googled on the Web? Or worse, is he just too shameless to care?

Mr. Rumsfeld didn’t go to Baghdad in 1983 to tour the museum. Then a private citizen, he had been dispatched as an emissary by the Reagan administration, which sought to align itself with Iraq in the Iran-Iraq war. Saddam was already a notorious thug. Well before Mr. Rumsfeld’s trip, Amnesty International had reported the dictator’s use of torture — “beating, burning, sexual abuse and the infliction of electric shocks” — on hundreds of political prisoners. Dozens more had been summarily executed or had “disappeared.” American intelligence agencies knew that Saddam had used chemical weapons to gas both Iraqi Kurds and Iranians.

According to declassified State Department memos detailing Mr. Rumsfeld’s Baghdad meetings, the American visitor never raised the subject of these crimes with his host. (Mr. Rumsfeld has since claimed otherwise, but that is not supported by the documents, which can be viewed online at George Washington University’s National Security Archive.) Within a year of his visit, the American mission was accomplished: Iraq and the United States resumed diplomatic relations for the first time since Iraq had severed them in 1967 in protest of American backing of Israel in the Six-Day War.

In his speech last week, Mr. Rumsfeld paraphrased Winston Churchill: Appeasing tyrants is “a bit like feeding a crocodile, hoping it would eat you last.” He can quote Churchill all he wants, but if he wants to self-righteously use that argument to smear others, the record shows that Mr. Rumsfeld cozied up to the crocodile of Baghdad as smarmily as anyone. To borrow the defense secretary’s own formulation, he suffers from moral confusion about Saddam.

Mr. Rumsfeld also suffers from intellectual confusion about terrorism. He might not have appeased Al Qaeda but he certainly enabled it. Like Chamberlain, he didn’t recognize the severity of the looming threat until it was too late. Had he done so, maybe his boss would not have blown off intelligence about imminent Qaeda attacks while on siesta in Crawford.

CONTINUED...

http://www.commondreams.org/views06/0903-25.htm

Hitler was often amused by "bourgeois intellectuals" who attended his meetings and later criticized the contents of his speeches for their crudeness, simplicity, or lack of rationale. Hitler accurately saw that when dealing with the masses one had to overcome their preconceived or instilled prejudices ("subconscious feeling") which could not be overcome by "reason."

If Only I Were A Dictator, by George W. Bush

A BUZZFLASH NEWS ANALYSIS

Yes, George W. Bush has stated he'd prefer to be a dictator at least three times, according to BuzzFlash.com:

* * *

"You don't get everything you want. A dictatorship would be a lot easier." Describing what it's like to be governor of Texas.
(Governing Magazine 7/98)

-- From Paul Begala's "Is Our Children Learning?"

"I told all four that there are going to be some times where we don't agree with each other, but that's OK. If this were a dictatorship, it would be a heck of a lot easier, just so long as I'm the dictator," Bush joked.

-- CNN.com, December 18, 2000

"A dictatorship would be a heck of a lot easier, there's no question about it," said.

-- Business Week, July 30, 2001

SOURCE:

http://www.buzzflash.com/analysis/2002/10/29_Dictator.html

A Final End to History?

Bush's Armageddon Wish

By PAUL CRAIG ROBERTS
Counterpunch June 12, 2006

EXCERPT...

Nuking Iran is an essential part of the attack plan. The US lacks the necessary conventional military force to invade and occupy Iran, but the use of nuclear weapons against Iran has a wider purpose. The neocons are determined not to have any more embarrassments, such as the Iraqi insurgency. By nuking Iran they intend to send a wider message that the US will use every means at its disposal to ensure its hegemony. The neocons believe that the use of nukes will convince Arabs and the wider world that there is no recourse to accepting America's will.

The neoconservatives could not care less about public opinion. Neocons are contemptuous of the American people. Leo Strauss taught neocons that it was their duty to deceive the clueless American people in order to implement their agenda of global domination. The neocons believe that they have a perfect right, even the obligation, to manipulate the public through propaganda and black ops in order to create acceptance and support for their wars of aggression.

The neocons are the epitome of evil, and they have succumbed to hubris. Like Hitler when he attacked the Soviet Union, neocons believe that their manipulative skills and use of military power will carry the day for their agenda. Hitler's hubris doomed Germany to destruction. What price will America pay for neocon hubris?

When the neocon nazis nuke Iran it will revive memories in Japan and break the US-Japanese alliance. Japan owns enough US Treasury bonds to be able to destroy both the US dollar and the market for Washington's endless red ink. Russia, China, India, and even our European lackeys will have it forcefully brought home to them that the US is an out-of-control rogue nation. They will unify against us. Most likely our bought and paid for puppets in the MIddle East will fall, and Islamic leaders will gain Pakistan's nuclear weapons. Al Qaeda will gain tens of millions of recruits.

Francis Fukuyama's phrase, "the end of history" takes on new meaning.

SOURCE:

http://www.counterpunch.org/roberts06122006.html

“Bush - Nazi Dealings Continued Until 1951” - Federal Documents

By John Buchanan and Stacey Michael
from The New Hampshire Gazette Vol. 248, No. 3, November 7, 2003

After the seizures in late 1942 of five U.S. enterprises he managed on behalf of Nazi industrialist Fritz Thyssen, Prescott Bush, the grandfather of President George W. Bush, failed to divest himself of more than a dozen "enemy national" relationships that continued until as late as 1951, newly-discovered U.S. government documents reveal.

Furthermore, the records show that Bush and his colleagues routinely attempted to conceal their activities from government investigators.

Bush's partners in the secret web of Thyssen-controlled ventures included former New York Governor W. Averell Harriman and his younger brother, E. Roland Harriman. Their quarter-century of Nazi financial transactions, from 1924-1951, were conducted by the New York private banking firm, Brown Brothers Harriman.

SNIP...

Although the additional seizures under the Trading with the Enemy Act did not take place until after the war, documents from The National Archives and Library of Congress confirm that Bush and his partners continued their Nazi dealings unabated. These activities included a financial relationship with the German city of Hanover and several industrial concerns. They went undetected by investigators until after World War Two.

At the same time Bush and the Harrimans were profiting from their Nazi partnerships, W. Averell Harriman was serving as President Franklin Delano Roosevelt's personal emissary to the United Kingdom during the toughest years of the war. On October 28, 1942, the same day two key Bush-Harriman-run businesses were being seized by the U.S. government, Harriman was meeting in London with Field Marshall Smuts to discuss the war effort.

Denial and Deceit

While Harriman was concealing his Nazi relationships from his government colleagues, Cornelius Livense, the top executive of the interlocking German concerns held under the corporate umbrella of Union Banking Corporation (UBC), repeatedly tried to mislead investigators, and was sometimes supported in his subterfuge by Brown Brothers Harriman.

CONTINUED...

http://www.nhgazette.com/cgi-bin/NHGstore.cgi?user_action=detail&catalogno=NN_Bush_Nazi_2

Military Dictatorship USA?

By Dr. Norman D. Livergood

"If Tyranny and Oppression come to this land, it will be in the guise of fighting a foreign enemy." -- James Madison, while a United States Congressman \

We usually think of a nation being controlled by a military dictatorship when a military leader seizes control through a putsch, as in the case of General Pervez Musharraf in Pakistan or Saddam Hussein in Iraq. The previous government is overthrown and a military strong man places himself in power with few if any constraints from judicial or legislative oversight.

But we must look for the essence of a military dictatorship, those features which are present whenever this form of oppression occurs. In essence, a military dictatorship is a form of government in which absolute power is concentrated in a repressive ruler or a small clique who use military and police power to dominate the people mentally and physically.

Taking this definition as our touchstone, in the United States we know we're living under a military dictatorship when we see:

disaster aid deliberately withheld by White House and Pentagon to impose unfettered military control

a leader retaining power through stealing the election of 2004 and put into power in 2000 by a coup d'etat, not through democratic elections

the military used to control the civilian population in violation of the U.S. Constitution

the president ordering a US citizen held indefinitely by the military

a shadow government being set up consisting entirely of executive branch officials in violation of the Constitution

government informants spying on fellow citizens

the highest amount of government funds going to military initiatives:

taxpayer money being used to subsidize and fund domestic and foreign "defense" corporations

taxpayer money being used to subsidize and fund domestic and foreign military operations: wars, embargoes, training, etc.

a dictatorial ruling clique creating unnecessary, homocidal wars as a way of remaining in power

the spread of militaristic values and the increasing power of the military in our society.

All these conditions are now present in the United States.


CONTINUED w all manner o' links...

http://www.hermes-press.com/militarismindex.htm

Ford & the Nazi War Efforts

Henry Ford was no Oskar Schindler

by Joshua Karliner, CorpWatch
November 1st, 1998

The Ford Motor Company's commercial-free sponsorship of NBC's airing of Schindler's List, the epic movie about the Holocaust, was a class act. Nevertheless, it would be remiss of us here at CorpWatch, not to point out Ford's contribution to Nazi war efforts.

The following is excerpted from a report printed by the United States Senate Committee on the Judiciary in 1974:

The activities of General Motors, Ford and Chrysler prior to and during World War II...are instructive. At that time, these three firms dominated motor vehicle production in both the United States and Germany. Due to its mass production capabilities, automobile manufacturing is one of the most crucial industries with respect to national defense. As a result, these firms retained the economic and political power to affect the shape of governmental relations both within and between these nations in a manner which maximized corporate global profits. In short, they were private governments unaccountable to the citizens of any country yet possessing tremendous influence over the course of war and peace in the world. The substantial contribution of these firms to the American war effort in terms of tanks, aircraft components, and other military equipment is widely acknowledged. Less well known are the simultaneous contributions of their foreign subsidiaries to the Axis Powers. In sum, they maximized profits by supplying both sides with the materiel needed to conduct the war.

During the 1920's and 1930's, the Big Three automakers undertook an extensive program of multinational expansion...By the mid-1930's, these three American companies owned automotive subsidiaries throughout Europe and the Far East; many of their largest facilities were located in the politically sensitive nations of Germany, Poland, Rumania, Austria, Hungary, Latvia, and Japan...Due to their concentrated economic power over motor vehicle production in both Allied and Axis territories, the Big Three inevitably became major factors in the preparations and progress of the war. In Germany, for example, General Motors and Ford became an integral part of the Nazi war efforts. GM's plants in Germany built thousands of bomber and jet fighter propulsion systems for the Luftwaffe at the same time that its American plants produced aircraft engines for the U.S. Army Air Corps....

Ford was also active in Nazi Germany's prewar preparations. In 1938, for instance, it opened a truck assembly plant in Berlin whose "real purpose," according to U.S. Army Intelligence, was producing "troop transport-type" vehicles for the Wehrmacht. That year Ford's chief executive received the Nazi German Eagle (first class)....

The outbreak of war in September 1939 resulted inevitably in the full conversion by GM and Ford of their Axis plants to the production of military aircraft and trucks.... On the ground, GM and Ford subsidiaries built nearly 90 percent of the armored "mule" 3-ton half-trucks and more than 70 percent of the Reich's medium and heavy-duty trucks. These vehicles, according to American intelligence reports, served as "the backbone of the German Army transportation system."....

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... Ford received a little less than $1 million, primarily as a result of damages sustained by its military truck complex at Cologne...

Due to their multinational dominance of motor vehicle production, GM and Ford became principal suppliers for the forces of fascism as well as for the forces of democracy. It may, of course, be argued that participating in both sides of an international conflict, like the common corporate practice of investing in both political parties before an election, is an appropriate corporate activity. Had the Nazis won, General Motors and Ford would have appeared impeccably Nazi; as Hitler lost, these companies were able to re-emerge impeccably American. In either case, the viability of these corporations and the interests of their respective stockholders would have been preserved.

SOURCE:

http://www.corpwatch.org/article.php?id=4368

...To my mind, it goes straight to the top. How’d this two-legged ass even get where he is today, almost literally to piss the entire Defense Department down the drain? Because he was hand-picked and installed by George W. Bush -- having been stovepiped by his friend and PNAC pal, Dick Cheney. By “taking” office, Bush then proved the vile flip side to the argument of those who originally despaired of Bush’s lack of intelligence, but consoled themselves with the reassurance that at least he was surrounding himself with good people. Bush brought them all in with him. None of them ascended to their positions from which to do such dreadful harm without him. You think Al Gore or John Kerry would have staffed up with any of these people? It all traces straight back to Dubya. If not for Bush, we wouldn’t have Cheney and his rolodex of horror -- Rumsfeld, Wolfowitz, Libby, Feith, Perle, Contradicta, Hadley, or anyone else. Many of these came directly from the viper pit at the PNAC, chaired by William Kristol, and infested by other wasps of war and divas of destruction. And to those who say Cheney’s primarily responsible, well, yes. But even he wouldn’t have been able to reach the top of the ziggurat without Bush accepting his premise that he was the best result of his own vice presidential talent search. In the spirit of the Bible that Bush and his apostate pals like to wrap themselves around: Bush begat Cheney who begat all the rest of these vermin. Rummy among them...

CONTINUED...

http://www.worldnewstrust.com/content/view/78/lang,en/

In the U.S., business comes before patriotism

BY PETER EICHENBERGER
IndyMedia SEPTEMBER 6, 2006



On his 75th birthday in 1938, Henry Ford (center) is awarded the Grand Cross of the Supreme Order of the German Eagle. Hitler's personal congratulatory message accompanied the award. William Dodd, the U.S. Ambassador to Germany in the 1930s, said in an interview that "certain American industrialists (i.e., Ford) had a great deal to do with bringing fascist regimes into being in both Germany and Italy."

Fidel Castro showed up at my house one sunny afternoon in 1959. It was daddy in a mask. Over the months, I watched the George Washington of Cuba (The New York Times) transmute to Robespierre in about nine minutes, as I remember. I've been interested ever since.

SNIP...

The next not-mystery is how by 1962, Soviet missiles came to be a threat. In 1959, legendarily primitive, sloppy Soviet manufacturing techniques made for ICBMs that could not with any assurance hit the United States, much less a "target." The Soviets couldn't manufacture miniature bearings of the size and precision needed for servocontrols in the birds. We just happened to have some of these bearings at our Cameron Park house. I thought they were some kind of jewelry when I first saw one. I had to put it under a microscope just to see what I had.

In stepped the Bryant Chucking Grinder Company of Vermont, whose Centalign B grinder was used to manufacture those bearings. Bryant obtained an export license from the Department of Commerce to ship to the USSR. The Pentagon went ape shit, as did the manufacturer of the actual bearings, who shipped 85 percent of its product to U.S. defense contractors.

"I was very much disturbed. We have attempted to demonstrate to the Department of Commerce the tragedy of these machines sold to Russia. This is folly which would undermine our defenses," said Horace Gilbert of Miniature Precision Bearings Inc. to the Senate.

Ultimately, 167 Centalign Bs were shipped to the USSR and the United States had a problem with the Soviets they hadn't had before. Ah, capitalism. Nothing new there.

CONTINUED...

http://www.indyweek.com/gyrobase/Content?oid=oid%3A36309

Bush: Secret CIA Prisons a 'Vital' Tool

Bush Admits CIA Runs Secret Prisons Overseas, Says Interrogations Made Terrorists Reveal Plots

By DEB RIECHMANN
The Associated Press

WASHINGTON - President Bush on Wednesday acknowledged for the first time that the CIA runs secret prisons overseas and said tough interrogation forced terrorist leaders to reveal plots to attack the United States and its allies.

Bush said 14 suspects including the mastermind of the Sept. 11 attacks and architects of the 2000 bombing of the USS Cole and the U.S. Embassy bombings in Kenya and Tanzania had been turned over to the Defense Department and moved to the U.S. detention center at Guantanamo Bay, Cuba, for trial.

SNIP...

Earlier this year, an anti-torture panel at the United Nations recommended the closure of Guantanamo and criticized alleged U.S. use of secret prisons and suspected delivery of prisoners to foreign countries for questioning. Some Democrats and human rights groups argued that the CIA's secret prison system did not allow monitoring for abuses and they hoped that it would be shut down.

"He finally acknowledged the elephant in the room that everybody had always been talking about," said Jumana Musa, advocacy director for Amnesty International USA.

"I think what surprised me is he seemed to be asking Congress to legalize it through statutes, essentially allowing him to continue to detain people in secret by sort of putting forth all this information that they got from these folks and somehow using that to justify what has been recognized by U.N. committees as an unlawful act and contrary to our treaty obligations."

CONTINUED...
http://abcnews.go.com/Politics/wireStory?id=2404142

About Those Nazi Appeasers

Bush Family Values

By MICHAEL DONNELLY
Counterpunch September 7, 2006

EXCERPT...

Harriman Bank was the official Nazi financial conduit in the US. Closely tied to Fritz Thyssen, who proudly claimed in his 1941 book "I Paid Hitler" that he was the Nazi Party's first and greatest financial backer. The Union Banking Corporation (UBC) was a subsidiary of Harriman created by (George Herbert) Walker and it was used for Nazi financial matters. Thyssen provided 100,000 gold marks ($10 million in today's dollars) to the Nazis in 1923 just prior to Hitler's failed putsch. By 1941, UBC held a private Nazi stash of over $3,000,000 ($36 million in today's dollars) in its New York vaults.

SNIP...

Silesian Steel used slave labor from Auschwitz (even before the concentration camp was built there) in its coal, iron and zinc mining operations. At Nuremberg, Flick was sentenced to seven years for Silesian's role in building up the Nazi war machine. Harriman, Bush and Walker were never charged.

June 14, 1940, nine months after the Nazis conquered Poland, the IG Farben Company opened an Auschwitz factory and slave labor camp in occupied Poland, to produce artificial rubber and gasoline from coal. This was done in a partnership with Rockefeller's Standard Oil Company (EXXON).

The millions made off the labor of hundreds of thousands of Nazi victims were inherited by William S. Farish III, grandson of William S. Farish, the head of the IG/Standard cartel. Farish III is George H.W. Bush's best friend and the person who took over Bush's assets and managed them in a blind trust after Bush was elected vice-president.

Investigator John Loftus has said, "As a former federal prosecutor, I would make a case for Prescott Bush, his father-in-law (George Walker) and Averill Harriman to be prosecuted for giving aid and comfort to the enemy. They remained on the boards of these companies knowing that they were of financial benefit to the nation of Germany."

CONTINUED...

http://www.counterpunch.org/donnelly09072006.html

Neocon’s Nazi Hero

How Carl Schmitt Spawned Fascist America

By ARTHUR VERSLUIS
Counterpunch August 10, 2006

At the insistence of the White House, the Pentagon publicly asserted in 2006 what has already become self-evident, that the United States would not observe the protocols of the Geneva Conventions concerning some prisoners. Coming as the announcement did on the heels of revelations about the prisons at Abu Ghraib, Guantánamo, and various secret locations to which the CIA had prisoners flown for interrogation and torture, it would seem that American citizens had lost their capacity for outrage or even indignation. But the fact remains that the selective abrogation of the Geneva Conventions, the George W. Bush administration's attempts to assert "unitary executive" power, has an instructive precedent.

As is well known, the White House has been eager to assert what is claimed to be the power of the "unitary executive," that is, the asserted power of the executive branch to override those provisions of laws with which it does not agree. This theory of the "unitary executive" meant, in practice, that the White House attached "signing statements" to hundreds of pieces of legislation enacted by Congress. Instead of vetoing bills, the Bush Jr. administration issues these statements asserting the administration's unilateral rejection of or re-interpretation of the legislation.

This asserted "unitary executive power" is not only a rationale for "signing statements.” It underlies nearly everything that the George W. Bush administration has done. To take the most historically important example, the invasion and occupation of Iraq took place without the authorization of Congress (that is, without any official Declaration of War, and of course without the imprimatur of the United Nations). A violation of both American and international law, the invasion of Iraq was, in fact, the unilateral abrogation of law by the American executive power.

The invasion of Iraq is, of course, not the only example, just the one with the most far-reaching and visible consequences. There are others. Consider the abrogation of FISA, the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act, whose purpose was to limit the abuse of federal uses of wiretaps or other forms of surveillance after the abuses of the 1960s and 1970s had been revealed. The scope of the wiretapping and other invasions of American citizens' privacy is not yet fully known, but no doubt eventually many abuses will be revealed. Only long after the election shenanigans of November, 2004, did Americans even learn that the Bush Jr. administration once again had unilaterally abrogated American law, asserting here too the "power of the unitary executive." What very few people have realized is that this notional "unitary executive" power has an instructive precedent, which is outlined in the works of the German legal theorist, Carl Schmitt. In the 1920s, Schmitt sharply criticized the parliamentary system of the Weimar Republic, in an analysis that has a striking resonance with the contemporary American Congress's morass of ineptness, paralysis, and manifest corruption. When National Socialism came to power in the 1930s, Schmitt defended the Third Reich and its right to peremptory justice by reference to the juridical example of the Inquisition.

According to Schmitt, the ultimate power of government is not to be found in legislation, but in the executive power to abrogate or suspend legislation. What matters is not the rule, but the exception, and "sovereign is he who decides the exception." Schmitt's aphorism describes how Hitler in fact took power, with the unilateral abrogation of civil liberties in Germany. Hitler imposed a "state of exception" on those whom he deemed alien to or a danger to the regime, and those in such a state of exception no longer have the rights of citizens. This state of exception, willed by the German unitary executive power, was the juridical basis for the Nazi death camps. The assertion of notional "unitary executive power" in part results from officials' prior disgust at the inherent weakness of a parliamentary system to forcefully address long-term problems facing society, like a weak fiat currency, economic crisis, or terrorism. A "unitary executive power" appeals to the "Right," to which Schmitt and purportedly the Bush Jr. administration belong, but, one has to note, it also could have appeal for the "Left." Such executive powers no doubt appeal to all who are certain of their own rectitude, certain that they are guided by destiny or by God to act, to be decisive. Thus one characteristic of fascism is said to be "decisionism." "At least we're doing something," a decisionist says - even if what "we're" doing is in fact despotic and destructive. George W. Bush is, he tells us, "the decider."

CONTINUED...

http://www.counterpunch.org/versluis08102006.html

ABC's Agit-Prop: Another Serving From Bush's Poison Kitchen

Written by Chris Floyd
Wednesday, 06 September 2006

Kos comes up with this nice catch:

Top Bush counterterrorism official bashes ABC's 9/11 mockumentary

Roger Cressey, former Chief of Staff to the President's Critical Infrastructure Protection Board at the White House from November 2001 to September 2002, told Scarborough:

SCARBOROUGH: Roger, let me begin with you. There are points of this docudrama that are more drama than fact. But talk about Bill Clinton and the central premise by ABC that he should have done more to get Bin Laden.

CRESSY: Joe, it's amazing, based on what I've seen so far is how much they've gotten wrong. They got the small stuff wrong such as Khalid Sheikh Mohammed instructing Ahmed Rassam to carry out the millenium attacks. Then they got the big stuff wrong, this fantasy about how we had a CIA officer and the Northern Alliance leader Ahmed Massoud looking at Bin Laden and they breathlessly call the White House to say we need to take him out and the White House said no. I mean it's sheer fantasy. So, if they want to critique the Clinton administration and the Bush administration, based on fact, I think that's fine. But what ABC has done here is something straight out of Disney and fantasyland. It's factually wrong. And that's shameful.

SCARBOROUGH: But at the same time, doesn't history show that Bill Clinton had several opportunities to go after bin Laden, but the President and his cabinet were afraid to do so because they may offend some people in the Arab world?

CRESSY: Actually, Joe, that had nothing to do with it. If you read the 9/11 Commission report, it makes it very clear. In most of those cases, George Tenet, the Director of the CIA, said because there was single source intelligence it was his recommendation to the President not to take the shot. There was never a case where we had a clear shot at Bin Laden and the decision to take it wasn't made. (End excerpt.)

What we are seeing is the deliberate concoction of a pernicious national myth, designed to serve the partisan ends of an extremist movement that despises democracy and seeks to install, by stealth, one-party authoritarian rule. Since we're all tossing around Nazi-era analogies these days – after all, we must follow the example of The Leader – this is another one, and far more apposite than any of the historical tripe Bush and Rummy and Condi have been throwing out. For the ABC movie – and the much deeper revisionism it represents – is another "stab-in-the-back" myth, such as the Nazis and their fellow travellers on the German Right employed to poison the political atmosphere and demonize their enemies. For them, the lie was that "Jews and liberals" sold out Germany in World War I; today, the myth is that Bill Clinton actually caused the murder of all those Americans on 9/11 by being so weak and liberal and law-abiding. Thus by extension all those who now dissent against Bush's policies are likewise feckless enablers of terrorism, who would unwittingly -- or even wittingly -- allow more Americans to be killed.

Naturally, the crank notion that Clinton had Osama dead to rights in his gunsights but cravenly failed to pull the trigger has been percolating for years in the fetid swamps and fever dreams of the American Right. But the significance of it being taken up like this by ABC, one of the old-line national networks – and being broadcast with such gravitas and fanfare (providing it to schools, airing it with no commercial interruptions for this important production, this vital historical lesson for the American people – as if it were "Schindler's List") – and being broadcast at such a crucial time, in the run-up to a national election – cannot be missed. It is a deliberate act of obesiance to The Leader and his faction. "We are with you, Leader," says ABC; "we will lie for you, we will re-write history for you, we will serve you!"

CONTINUED...

http://www.chris-floyd.com/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=834&Itemid=135

A presidential visit to Auschwitz

The Holocaust and the Bush family fortune

By Bill Vann
5 June 2003

“History is a reminder of what’s possible.” These were the words spoken by President George Bush as he emerged from a guided tour of the gas chambers at Auschwitz. The former Nazi death camp in Poland was one of the first stops on his seven-day tour of Europe and the Middle East.

What precisely the US president meant by this banal comment is not clear. However, given Bush’s political record—assembly-line executions in Texas, Guantanamo’s Camp X-Ray, the indefinite imprisonment of US citizens without charges, two preemptive wars—it could be open to the most sinister of interpretations.

There is no doubt that the visit to Auschwitz was choreographed to serve immediate policy objectives: invoking the horrors of Hitler’s concentration camps to further an agenda of militarism and domestic repression. Perhaps no greater disservice could be done to the memory of the six million Jews and the millions of others who were murdered by the Nazis.

In a speech delivered in Krakow that same day, Bush declared that the concentration camps “remind us that evil is real and must be called by name and must be opposed.” He continued: “Having seen the works of evil firsthand on this continent, we must never lose the courage to oppose it everywhere.”

The cause of the Holocaust, Bush suggested, was “evil.” For the US president, the word “evil” serves to cover up a multitude of sins. He has used it repeatedly to describe the Islamic fundamentalist group that carried out the September 11, 2001 terrorist attacks. On numerous occasions he has referred to the leader of Al Qaeda as “the evil one.” This particular expression serves a very immediate political purpose, since it avoids naming Osama bin Laden and thereby calling to mind the longstanding business association between the Bushes and the wealthy bin Laden family of Saudi Arabia.

The existence of “evil” constitutes the only explanation given by the Bush administration for the emergence of Islamic fundamentalist terrorism. Such a semi-mystical and religious presentation (which, of course, assumes that the United States government embodies “good”) has the advantage of precluding any consideration of politics or history. In particular, it obscures the role played by US foreign policy—Washington’s alliance with despotic oil-rich regimes such as the one in Saudi Arabia, US sponsorship of the Afghan Mujahadeen, the CIA’s covert war against secular nationalist and socialist groups in the Middle East, the unconditional support for Israel against the Palestinians—in creating the social and political conditions in which retrograde tendencies like Al Qaeda could grow.

The use of the word “evil” serves a similar function in the case of the Holocaust. This attempt to obscure the social, political and economic roots of the rise of fascism in Europe in the 1930s and the horrific crimes that followed is not unique to Bush. The adoption of anti-communism as the core of the post-World War II US ideology made any analysis of the anti-socialist roots of fascism inconvenient. Rather, communism and fascism were equated as “totalitarian” and “evil.”

SNIP...

Prescott Bush and the Nazis

CONTINUED...

http://wsws.org/articles/2003/jun2003/bush-j05.shtml

So it was most apt that the only question Bush was heard to ask during his Auschwitz tour actually dealt with Holocaust revisionism: "Do people challenge the accuracy of what you present?" he asked his guide, the New York Times reports. This might seem a rather bizarre question at first glance – but then, Bush has a personal stake in the cultivation of historical amnesia. His own family fortune was built in part by a long and profitable collusion with the Nazis – an ugly story oft told here, and raked up again by Newsweek Poland during the presidential visit.

SOURCE:

http://empireburlesquenow.blogspot.com/2005/10/revise-and-conquer-bush-family-history.html

Press Gaggle on Auschwitz I and Auschwitz II-Birkenau

Ari Fleischer, White House Press Secretary

Krakow, Poland
May 31, 2003

EXCERPT...

MR. FLEISCHER: Oh, that probably extended some 30, 40 feet behind glass, and you just see hair. Women's hair. The guide talked about in the next room that Auschwitz was also a site of plunder because as the Jews were rounded up and sent there, they brought their belongings with them so they had their suitcases. They didn't know they were going to their death, so they carried their life's possessions with them, which was then quickly plundered, the guide explained.

The President saw the Jewish prayer shawls that were hanging. And then another deeply moving part, he saw artificial limbs, actual artificial limbs, prosthesis, legs that were there and which she explained to the President, even these were plundered after people were killed, and then used back in Germany.

The President would say things such as "Powerful." I just wrote down as I listened to him -- "powerful." When he saw the suitcases, he said, "So sad." And then at one point when he went by another display where there were teeny little shoes, the President looked at it and said, "All the little baby shoes." He told the guide, "You've done a good job recording history."

The President talked about the current context of it, how many people come each year. He asked, where do they come from. He asked, "Do people challenge the accuracy of what you present?" And one cell --

Q: And what did the guide say?

MR. FLEISCHER: She explained where people come from. They come from all over, she said. A lot come from Poland, from the United States, from Israel, from Germany.

Q: Did she answer his question, do people challenge --

MR. FLEISCHER: I didn't get it. If she did, I don't remember, I didn't write it down.

CONTINUED...

http://www.state.gov/p/eur/rls/rm/2003/21131.htm

Nazis in the attic, part 6

By Randy Davis

GEORGE HERBERT WALKER BUSH

...Like Nixon, George Bush was deeply involved with supporting the Nazis in the Republican's closet. In fact, support for the Nazis was a Bush family tradition which goes back more than six decades and, once again, to Allen Dulles.

Loftus and Aarons write: "The real story of George Bush starts well before he launched his own career. It goes back to the 1920s, when the Dulles brothers and the other pirates of Wall Street were making their deals with the Nazis. . . ."

THE BUSH-DULLES-NAZI CONNECTION

SNIP…

"Sullivan & Cromwell was not the only firm engaged in funding Germany. According to 'The Splendid Blond Beast,' Christopher Simpson's seminal history of the politics of genocide and profit, Brown Brothers, Harriman was another bank that specialized in investments in Germany. The key figure was Averill Harriman, a dominating figure in the American establishment. . . .

"The firm originally was known as W. A. Harriman & Company. The link between Harriman & Company's American investors and Thyssen started in the 1920s, through the Union Banking Corporation, which began trading in 1924. In just one three-year period, the Harriman firm sold more than $50 million of German bonds to American investors. 'Bert' Walker was Union Banking's president, and the firm was located in the offices of Averill Harriman's company at 39 Broadway in New York.

"In 1926 Bert Walker did a favor for his new son-in-law, Prescott Bush. It was the sort of favor families do to help their children make a start in life, but Prescott came to regret it bitterly. Walker made Prescott vice president of W. A. Harriman. The problem was that Walker's specialty was companies that traded with Germany. As Thyssen and the other German industrialists consolidated Hitler's political power in the 1930s, an American financial connection was needed. According to our sources, Union Banking became an out-and-out Nazi money-laundering machine. . . .

SNIP…

". . . In a November 1935 article in Common Sense, retired marine general Smedley D. Butler blamed Brown Brothers, Harriman for having the U.S. marines act like 'racketeers' and 'gangsters' in order to exploit financially the peasants of Nicaragua. . . .

CONTINUED…

http://emperors-clothes.com/articles/randy/swas5.htm

False Flag Operations: Declassified Military Documents Show How US Government Planned Terrorist Attacks Against its Own Citizens

Confirmed in an ABC News article and the National Security Archive of the George Washington University, shocking formerly top secret 1962 military documents, now declassified, provide irrefutable evidence that the Joint Chiefs of Staff & Chairman, the top US military leaders, planned and authorized terrorist attacks to kill American citizens. It involved using airplanes, blowing up a US ship and even orchestrating violent terrorism in American cities using fabricated evidence to falsely incriminate the Cuban government in order to justify an unpopular war to remove Castro from power.

New York, NY (PRWEB) September 7th, 2006 – As reported by ABC News, stunning military documents codenamed "Operation Northwoods" were declassified in recent years and show how in 1962, the top US military leaders planned an operation to create terror attacks against its own cities and kill US citizens. See: http://abcnews.go.com/US/story?id=92662&page=1

The documents state that through the fabrication of false evidence, the US would blame Cuba and gain public support for an unpopular war against Castro. They included developing a fake Communist Cuban terror campaign in the Miami area, the use of airplanes, and much more.

For further details, the now declassified military documents are available at the National Security Archive of the George Washington University: http://www.gwu.edu/~nsarchiv/news/20010430/

In his newly published book "Towers of Deception – The Media Cover-Up of 9/11," Barrie Zwicker, writes about Operation Northwoods and many other such operations that the military and intelligence community refer to as "false flag operations." http://www.newsociety.com/bookid/3932

Zwicker is a lifelong journalist who was a media critic for 35 years and who often appeared on Canadian national TV and radio.

His book explains that these covert operations are designed to appear as if they are being carried out by other entities, such as other countries or terrorist groups, to help demonize them and justify wars for geopolitical reasons and for financial gains.

CONTINUED...

http://www.emediawire.com/releases/2006/9/emw434292.htm

Day of Affirmation

University of Capetown, South Africa
June 6, 1966

Mr. Chancellor, Mr. Vice Chancellor, Professor Robertson, Mr. Diamond, Mr. Daniel, Ladies and Gentlemen:

I come here this evening because of my deep interest and affection for a land settled by the Dutch in the mid-seventeenth century, then taken over by the British, and at last independent; a land in which the native inhabitants were at first subdued, but relations with whom remain a problem to this day; a land which defined itself on a hostile frontier; a land which has tamed rich natural resources through the energetic application of modern technology; a land which was once the importer of slaves, and now must struggle to wipe out the last traces of that former bondage. I refer, of course, to the United States of America.

But I am glad to come here, and my wife and I and all of our party are glad to come here to South Africa, and we are glad to come here to Capetown. I am already greatly enjoying my visit here. I am making an effort to meet and exchange views with people of all walks of life, and all segments of South African opinion -- including those who represent the views of the government. Today I am glad to meet with the National Union of South African Students. For a decade, NUSAS has stood and worked for the principles of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights -- principles which embody the collective hopes of men of good will around the globe.

Your work, at home and in international student affairs, has brought great credit to yourselves and your country. I know the National Student Association in the United States feels a particularly close relationship with this organization. And I wish to thank especially Mr. Ian Robertson, who first extended this invitation on behalf of NUSAS, I wish to thank him for his kindness to me in inviting me. I am very sorry that he cannot be with us here this evening. I was happy to have had the opportunity to meet and speak with him earlier this evening, and I presented him with a copy of Profiles in Courage, which was a book written by President John Kennedy and was signed to him by President Kennedy's widow, Mrs. John Kennedy.

This is a Day of Affirmation -- a celebration of liberty. We stand here in the name of freedom.

At the heart of that western freedom and democracy is the belief that the individual man, the child of God, is the touchstone of value, and all society, all groups, and states, exist for that person's benefit. Therefore the enlargement of liberty for individual human beings must be the supreme goal and the abiding practice of any western society.

The first element of this individual liberty is the freedom of speech; the right to express and communicate ideas, to set oneself apart from the dumb beasts of field and forest; the right to recall governments to their duties and obligations; above all, the right to affirm one's membership and allegiance to the body politic -- to society -- to the men with whom we share our land, our heritage, and our children's future.

Hand-in-hand with freedom of speech goes the power to be heard -- to share in the decisions of government which shape men's lives. Everything that makes men's lives worthwhile -- family, work, education, a place to rear one's children and a place to rest one's head -- all this depends on the decisions of government; all can be swept away by a government which does not heed the demands of its people, and I mean all of its people. Therefore, the essential humanity of man can be protected and preserved only where the government must answer -- not just to the wealthy; not just to those of a particular religion, not just to those of a particular race; but to all of the people.

And even government by the consent of the governed, as in our own Constitution, must be limited in its power to act against its people: so that there may be no interference with the right to worship, but also no interference with the security of the home; no arbitrary imposition of pains or penalties on an ordinary citizen by officials high or low; no restriction on the freedom of men to seek education or to seek work or opportunity of any kind, so that each man may become all that he is capable of becoming.

These are the sacred rights of western society. These were the essential differences between us and Nazi Germany as they were between Athens and Persia.

They are the essences of our differences with communism today. I am unalterably opposed to communism because it exalts the state over the individual and over the family, and because its system contains a lack of freedom of speech, of protest, of religion, and of the press, which is characteristic of a totalitarian regime. The way of opposition to communism, however, is not to imitate its dictatorship, but to enlarge individual human freedom. There are those in every land who would label as "communist" every threat to their privilege. But may I say to you, as I have seen on my travels in all sections of the world, reform is not communism. And the denial of freedom, in whatever name, only strengthens the very communism it claims to oppose.

Many nations have set forth their own definitions and declarations of these principles. And there have often been wide and tragic gaps between promise and performance, ideal and reality. Yet the great ideals have constantly recalled us to our own duties. And -- with painful slowness -- we in the United States have extended and enlarged the meaning and the practice of freedom to all of our people.

For two centuries, my own country has struggled to overcome the self-imposed handicap of prejudice and discrimination based on nationality, on social class, or race -- discrimination profoundly repugnant to the theory and to the command of our Constitution. Even as my father grew up in Boston, Massachusetts, signs told him that, "No Irish Need Apply.” Two generations later, President Kennedy became the first Irish Catholic, and the first Catholic, to head the nation; but how many men of ability had, before 1961, been denied the opportunity to contribute to the nation's progress because they were Catholic, or because they were of Irish extraction? How many sons of Italian or Jewish or Polish parents slumbered in the slums -- untaught, unlearned, their potential lost forever to our nation and to the human race? Even today, what price will we pay before we have assured full opportunity to millions of Negro Americans?

In the last five years we have done more to assure equality to our Negro citizens and to help the deprived, both white and black, than in the hundred years before that time. But much, much more remains to be done.

For there are millions of Negroes untrained for the simplest of jobs, and thousands every day denied their full and equal rights under the law; and the violence of the disinherited, the insulted and the injured, looms over the streets of Harlem and of Watts and Southside Chicago.

But a Negro American trains as an astronaut, one of mankind's first explorers into outer space; another is the chief barrister of the United States government, and dozens sit on the benches of our court; and another, Dr. Martin Luther King, is the second man of African descent to win the Nobel Peace Prize for his non-violent efforts for social justice between all of the races.

We have passed laws prohibiting discrimination in education, in employment, in housing; but these laws alone cannot overcome the heritage of centuries -- of broken families and stunted children, and poverty and degradation and pain.

So the road toward equality of freedom is not easy and great cost and danger march alongside all of us. We are committed to peaceful and non-violent change and that is important for all to understand -- though change is unsettling. Still, even in the turbulence of protest and struggle is greater hope for the future, as men learn to claim and achieve for themselves the rights formerly petitioned from others.

And most important of all, all the panoply of government power has been committed to the goal of equality before the law - as we are now committing ourselves to achievement of equal opportunity in fact.

We must recognize the full human equality of all of our people -- before God, before the law, and in the councils of government. We must do this, not because it is economically advantageous -- although it is; not because the laws of God command it -- although they do; not because people in other lands wish it so. We must do it for the single and fundamental reason that it is the right thing to do.

We recognize that there are problems and obstacles before the fulfillment of these ideals in the United States as we recognize that other nations, in Latin America and in Asia and in Africa, have their own political, economic, and social problems, their unique barriers to the elimination of injustices.

In some, there is concern that change will submerge the rights of a minority, particularly where that minority is of a different race than that of the majority. We in the United States believe in the protection of minorities; we recognize the contributions that they can make and the leadership they can provide; and we do not believe that any people -- whether majority or minority, or individual human beings -- are "expendable" in the cause of theory or policy. We recognize also that justice between men and nations is imperfect, and that humanity sometimes progresses very slowly indeed.

All do not develop in the same manner and at the same pace. Nations, like men, often march to the beat of different drummers, and the precise solutions of the United States can neither be dictated nor transplanted to others, and that is not our intention. What is important however is that all nations must march toward increasing freedom; toward justice for all; toward a society strong and flexible enough to meet the demands of all of its people, whatever their race, and the demands of a world of immense and dizzying change that face us all.

In a few hours, the plane that brought me to this country crossed over oceans and countries which have been a crucible of human history. In minutes we traced migrations of men over thousands of years; seconds, the briefest glimpse, and we passed battlefields on which millions of men once struggled and died. We could see no national boundaries, no vast gulfs or high walls dividing people from people; only nature and the works of man -- homes and factories and farms -- everywhere reflecting man's common effort to enrich his life. Everywhere new technology and communications brings men and nations closer together, the concerns of one inevitably become the concerns of all. And our new closeness is stripping away the false masks, the illusion of differences which is at the root of injustice and hate and war. Only earthbound man still clings to the dark and poisoning superstition that his world is bounded by the nearest hill, his universe ends at river's shore, his common humanity is enclosed in the tight circle of those who share his town or his views and the color of his skin.

It is your job, the task of the young people in this world, to strip the last remnants of that ancient, cruel belief from the civilization of man.

Each nation has different obstacles and different goals, shaped by the vagaries of history and of experience. Yet as I talk to young people around the world I am impressed not by the diversity but by the closeness of their goals, their desires, and their concerns and their hope for the future. There is discrimination in New York, the racial inequality of apartheid in South Africa, and serfdom in the mountains of Peru. People starve to death in the streets of India; a former Prime Minister is summarily executed in the Congo; intellectuals go to jail in Russia; and thousands are slaughtered in Indonesia; wealth is lavished on armaments everywhere in the world. These are different evils; but they are the common works of man. They reflect the imperfections of human justice, the inadequacy of human compassion, the defectiveness of our sensibility toward the sufferings of our fellows; they mark the limit of our ability to use knowledge for the well-being of our fellow human beings throughout the world. And therefore they call upon common qualities of conscience and indignation, a shared determination to wipe away the unnecessary sufferings of our fellow human beings at home and around the world.

It is these qualities which make of our youth today the only true international community. More than this I think that we could agree on what kind of a world we want to build. It would be a world of independent nations, moving toward international community, each of which protected and respected the basic human freedoms. It would be a world which demanded of each government that it accept its responsibility to insure social justice. It would be a world of constantly accelerating economic progress -- not material welfare as an end in of itself, but as a means to liberate the capacity of every human being to pursue his talents and to pursue his hopes. It would, in short, be a world that we would all be proud to have built.

Just to the north of here are lands of challenge and of opportunity -- rich in natural resources, land and minerals and people. Yet they are also lands confronted by the greatest odds -- overwhelming ignorance, internal tensions and strife, and great obstacles of climate and geography. Many of these nations, as colonies, were oppressed and were exploited. Yet they have not estranged themselves from the broad traditions of the West; they are hoping and they are gambling their progress and their stability on the chance that we will meet our responsibilities to them, to help them overcome their poverty.

In the world we would like to build, South Africa could play an outstanding role and a role of leadership in that effort. This country is without question a preeminent repository of the wealth and the knowledge and the skill of the continent. Here are the greater part of Africa's research scientists and steel production, most of it reservoirs of coal and of electric power. Many South Africans have made major contributions to African technical development and world science; the names of some are known wherever men seek to eliminate the ravages of tropical disease and of pestilence. In your faculties and councils, here in this very audience, are hundreds and thousands of men and women who could transform the lives of millions for all time to come.

But the help and leadership of South Africa or of the United States cannot be accepted if we -- within our own countries or in our relationships with others -- deny individual integrity, human dignity, and the common humanity of man. If we would lead outside our own borders; if we would help those who need our assistance; if we would meet our responsibilities to mankind; we must first, all of us, demolish the borders which history has erected between men within our own nations -- barriers of race and religion, social class and ignorance.

Our answer is the world's hope; it is to rely on youth. The cruelties and the obstacles of this swiftly changing planet will not yield to obsolete dogmas and outworn slogans. It cannot be moved by those who cling to a present which is already dying, who prefer the illusion of security to the excitement and danger which comes with even the most peaceful progress. This world demands the qualities of youth: not a time of life but a state of mind, a temper of the will, a quality of imagination, a predominance of courage over timidity, of the appetite for adventure over the life of ease -- a man like the Chancellor of this University. It is a revolutionary world that we all live in; and thus, as I have said in Latin America and Asia and in Europe and in my own country, the United States, it is the young people who must take the lead. Thus you and your young compatriots everywhere have had thrust upon you a greater burden of responsibility than any generation that has ever lived.

"There is," said an Italian philosopher, "nothing more difficult to take in hand, more perilous to conduct, or more uncertain in its success than to take the lead in the introduction of a new order of things." Yet this is the measure of the task of your generation and the road is strewn with many dangers.

First is the danger of futility; the belief there is nothing one man or one woman can do against the enormous array of the world's ills -- against misery, against ignorance, or injustice and violence. Yet many of the world's great movements, of thought and action, have flowed from the work of a single man. A young monk began the Protestant reformation, a young general extended an empire from Macedonia to the borders of the earth, and a young woman reclaimed the territory of France. It was a young Italian explorer who discovered the New World, and 32-year-old Thomas Jefferson who proclaimed that all men are created equal. "Give me a place to stand," said Archimedes, "and I will move the world." These men moved the world, and so can we all. Few will have the greatness to bend history; but each of us can work to change a small portion of the events, and in the total of all these acts will be written the history of this generation. Thousands of Peace Corps volunteers are making a difference in the isolated villages and the city slums of dozens of countries. Thousands of unknown men and women in Europe resisted the occupation of the Nazis and many died, but all added to the ultimate strength and freedom of their countries. It is from numberless diverse acts of courage such as these that the belief that human history is thus shaped. Each time a man stands up for an ideal, or acts to improve the lot of others, or strikes out against injustice, he sends forth a tiny ripple of hope, and crossing each other from a million different centers of energy and daring those ripples build a current which can sweep down the mightiest walls of oppression and resistance.

"If Athens shall appear great to you," said Pericles, "consider then that her glories were purchased by valiant men, and by men who learned their duty." That is the source of all greatness in all societies, and it is the key to progress in our own time.

The second danger is that of expediency; of those who say that hopes and beliefs must bend before immediate necessities. Of course if we must act effectively we must deal with the world as it is. We must get things done. But if there was one thing that President Kennedy stood for that touched the most profound feeling of young people across the world, it was the belief that idealism, high aspiration, and deep convictions are not incompatible with the most practical and efficient of programs -- that there is no basic inconsistency between ideals and realistic possibilities -- no separation between the deepest desires of heart and of mind and the rational application of human effort to human problems. It is not realistic or hard-headed to solve problems and take action unguided by ultimate moral aims and values, although we all know some who claim that it is so. In my judgement, it is thoughtless folly. For it ignores the realities of human faith and of passion and of belief; forces ultimately more powerful than all the calculations of our economists or of our generals. Of course to adhere to standards, to idealism, to vision in the face of immediate dangers takes great courage and takes self-confidence. But we also know that only those who dare to fail greatly can ever achieve greatly.

It is this new idealism which is also, I believe, the common heritage of a generation which has learned that while efficiency can lead to the camps at Auschwitz, or the streets of Budapest, only the ideals of humanity and love can climb the hills of the Acropolis.

A third danger is timidity. Few men are willing to brave the disapproval of their fellows, the censure of their colleagues, the wrath of their society. Moral courage is a rarer commodity than bravery in battle or great intelligence. Yet it is the one essential, vital quality for those who seek to change the world which yields most painfully to change. Aristotle tells us "At the Olympic Games it is not the finest or the strongest men who are crowned, but those who enter the lists. ... So too in the life of the honorable and the good it is they who act rightly who win the prize." I believe that in this generation those with the courage to enter the conflict will find themselves with companions in every corner of the world.

For the fortunate amongst us, the fourth danger is comfort; the temptation to follow the easy and familiar path of personal ambition and financial success so grandly spread before those who have the privilege of an education. But that is not the road history has marked out for us. There is a Chinese curse which says "May he live in interesting times." Like it or not, we live in interesting times. They are times of danger and uncertainty; but they are also the most creative of any time in the history of mankind. And everyone here will ultimately be judged -- will ultimately judge himself -- on the effort he has contributed to building a new world society and the extent to which his ideals and goals have shaped that effort.

So we part, I to my country and you to remain. We are -- if a man of forty can claim the privilege -- fellow members of the world's largest younger generation. Each of us has our own work to do. I know at times you must feel very alone with your problems and with your difficulties. But I want to say how impressed I am with what you stand for and for the effort you are making; and I say this not just for myself, but men and women all over the world. And I hope you will often take heart from the knowledge that you are joined with your fellow young people in every land, they struggling with their problems and you with yours, but all joined in a common purpose; that, like the young people of my own country and of every country that I have visited, you are all in many ways more closely united to the brothers of your time than to the older generation in any of these nations; you are determined to build a better future. President Kennedy was speaking to the young people of America, but beyond them to young people everywhere, when he said "The energy, the faith, the devotion which we bring to this endeavor will light our country and all who serve it -- and the glow from that fire can truly light the world."

And, he added, "With a good conscience our only sure reward, with history the final judge of our deeds, let us go forth and lead the land we love, asking His blessing and His help, but knowing that here on Earth God's work must truly be our own." I thank you.

SOURCE:

http://www.rfkmemorial.org/lifevision/dayofaffirmation/