Now that they got Osama, will they go after the remaining 911 perps?

reply to post by poet1b


Oh, for Pete's sake ,please give me some evidence that Hitler's financial bankers ended up controlling the CIA and that the Bush family were " tied in ".

Originally posted by Alfie1
reply to post by poet1b

 

Oh, for Pete's sake ,please give me some evidence that Hitler's financial bankers ended up controlling the CIA and that the Bush family were " tied in ".

Oh, for Pete's sake, have you not heard of internet search engines? It is a well known, historical fact that Prescott Bush financed the Nazis.

Originally posted by micpsi

Originally posted by Alfie1
reply to post by poet1b

 

Oh, for Pete's sake ,please give me some evidence that Hitler's financial bankers ended up controlling the CIA and that the Bush family were " tied in ".

Oh, for Pete's sake, have you not heard of internet search engines? It is a well known, historical fact that Prescott Bush financed the Nazis.

Prescott Bush was GWB's grandfather and he died in 1972. What the hell has he to do with GWB's presidency ?

Originally posted by Alfie1
Prescott Bush was GWB's grandfather and he died in 1972. What the hell has he to do with GWB's presidency ?

It's yet more of the standard conspiracy mongoring bullsh*t being passed around by those damned fool web sites. Prescott Bush worked for a bank, that was owned by a Dutch conglomerate, which was owned by a German conglomerate, which was owned by a German fiancier who gave the Nazis money during his early days. The guy stopped giving money after Kristalnacht and eventually wound up in a concentration camp. This five degrees of separation, "Kevin Bacon" game is what they're using to show "GWB has links to Hitler", to make it look like GWB is shouting SIEG HEIL to a portrait of Hitler in the White House basement.

This "GWB has links to Hitler" is technically true, but it's also true that the stunt is immensely childish. Using the same logic, every single conspiracy proponent here on ATS likewise has "links to Hitler" too. You just need to find the right five people. Who knows whether someone's grandfather here had a friend that served in WWII who gave a cigarette to the brother of Hitler's personal driver?

These conspiracy people really have no credibility.

reply to post by micpsi


There is a great deal of evidence out that about this history. Here is a good link that I found. I had a much better link, but would have to dig it up. These associations are well established, and when you start rading how these players all have worked together over the decades it becomes much more clear as to what has been going on.

www.williambowles.info...

The Bush regime is part of an unbroken link that extends back to the founding of Hitler’s National Socialist Party through the funding it received from Brown Brothers Harriman Banking, Prescott Bush's bank and the subsequent link between this bank and Kellog Brown and Root, now a subsidiary of Halliburton and its connections to Bush through the Rumsfeld/Cheney connection and their connection to Halliburton. Brown Brothers Harriman Bank owned Dresser Industries, one of the world’s largest oil drilling companies that in 1998, under urging from Dick Cheney was purchased by Halliburton in an $8.1 billion dollar deal. The link is complete. And yes, it is the same Brown in Brown and Root as the Brown Brothers Harriman Bank.

The point is, a clique of key big business interests extending back over several generations runs the US. And that if anyone doubted that, putting it down to wild ideas of a conspiracy, you have to be blind not see it now. That Bush’s wealth descends directly from backing the Nazi Party is incontrovertible and that the Bush family’s involvement in the trade in drugs and weapons as an intrinsic part of the 'war on communism', later to become the 'war on terror' that extends back thirty years is also incontrovertible.

Here is a better link, which shows the connection to the CIA

www.enter.net...

By 1926, W.A. Harriman was doing so well that Walker gave his son-in-law, Prescott Bush, the gift of making him a vice president. In 1931, W.A. Harriman merged with a British firm to create Brown Brothers, Harriman, and Prescott Bush became a senior partner. During the 1930's, Brown Brothers, Harriman would increasingly direct its clients' investments to German companies. The Rockefeller family was prominent among these clients, and Standard Oil developed particularly close connections with the chemical giant I.G. Farben.

It was into this heady atmosphere of high-level investments and financial manipulation that Allen Dulles entered when he joined the firm of Sullivan and Cromwell in 1926. He would become the lawyer for the Thyssens' Rotterdam bank and would also represent other German firms, including I.G. Farben.

However, there was a serpent in this businessmen's Eden, and its name was Adolph Hitler. August Thyssen's son and successor, Fritz Thyssen, was an enthusiastic supporter of Hitler and had been funding the Nazi Party since 1923. Other German industrialists would do the same. It is hard to say to what extent the American investors shared Thyssen's enthusiasm, though it seems likely that most of them were swayed less by ideology than by the prospect that Hitler would be good for business. Either way, the outcome was that many wealthy and powerful Americans wound up supporting a regime that would ultimately become their own nation's enemy, and investing in the very firms that would provide the core of that regime's military machine.

Early in 1933, both Dulles brother attended a meeting in Germany where German industrialists agreed to back Hitler's bid for power in exchange for his pledge to break the German unions. A few months later, John Foster Dulles negotiated a deal with Hitler's economics minister whereby all German trade with the United States would be coordinated through a syndicate headed by Averell Harriman's cousin. With the Nazis enforcing a favorable climate for business, the profits for Thyssen and other companies soared, and the Union Banking Corporation increasingly became a Nazi money-laundering machine. In 1934, George Herbert Walker placed Prescott Bush on Union Bank's board of directors, and Bush and Harriman also began to use the bank as the basis for a complex and deceptive system of holding companies.

These aren't six degrees of separation, they are direct business partners, and family ties.

Your second extract makes two claims that are without any evidence at all. Basically in the context in which they appear they're just innuendo.

Originally posted by poet1b

By 1926, W.A. Harriman was doing so well that Walker gave his son-in-law, Prescott Bush, the gift of making him a vice president.... chemical giant I.G. Farben.

It was into this heady atmosphere of high-level investments and financial manipulation that Allen Dulles entered when he joined the firm of Sullivan and Cromwell in 1926. He would become the lawyer for the Thyssens' Rotterdam bank and would also represent other German firms, including I.G. Farben.

There's nothing to suggest financial manipulation in the paragraph before that. It's pure spin. Indeed the situation described doesn't even seem that "heady".

Early in 1933, both Dulles brother attended a meeting in Germany where German industrialists agreed to back Hitler's bid for power in exchange for his pledge to break the German unions. A few months later, John Foster Dulles negotiated a deal with Hitler's economics minister whereby all German trade with the United States would be coordinated through a syndicate headed by Averell Harriman's cousin. With the Nazis enforcing a favorable climate for business, the profits for Thyssen and other companies soared, and the Union Banking Corporation increasingly became a Nazi money-laundering machine.

These link are regrettable, but hardly surprising. Germany had cheap but skilled labour and was ripe for investment in the post-weimar years. It's not surprising that US companies were participating in what amounted to an economic boom.

To suggest that the bank was a nazi money launderer is to suggest that there was something illegal going on, which is not substantiated. Ethically there may have been all sorts of issues, but lots of Americans don't like jews even now - just look at this board - so I doubt a few "cleansings" would have worried anybody in 1933. And bear in mind that the US would not go to war with Germany for another eight years or more.

I'm not arguing that capital doesn't behave immorally or with scant regard for human misery. But putting all this together and pretending it's evidence of a corrupt gang in the background subverting the economic system for their own gain is to ignore the core of the issue. Which in my opinion is that capital is dangerous in and of itself. It may be comforting to believe that everything would work okay if it wasn't for a nasty clique, but it's not helpful.

But my main point is about the quality of argument in the extract. It doesn't back up its claims so I don't find it persuasive.

Originally posted by TrickoftheShade
But my main point is about the quality of argument in the extract. It doesn't back up its claims so I don't find it persuasive.

To add to the point, if you look at Thyssen's contunued history, it turns how that he stopped giving money to the Nazis after Kristalnacht, when he became horrified at Hitler's brutality. He was eventually arrested and thrown into a concentration camp, so in truth, Prescott Bush having links to a concentration camp prisoner is more accurate than Prescott bush having links to Hitler financiers. I notice the conspiracy people always stop reading once they get to the financing part. I wonder why?

This whole inane thread is something that only a fourteen year old would find relevent, so how about getting back to the question I asked- just WHO are the remaining 9/11 perps the OP is asking whether they'll be going after?

reply to post by TrickoftheShade


Seriously?

so I doubt a few "cleansings" would have worried anybody in 1933.

Um, yeah they did bother a great many people, leading to WW II. The first people Hitler took out when he took over the reigns of power were union leaders. This is a little known fact of history.

That you would make such an insane statement shows how disconnected from reality you are.

These business connection weren't circumstantial, they were deliberate efforts to undermine markets and rights. That the same connections are tied together from the rise of Hitler through the same groups, a constant stream of activity involving several major incidents in history all the way through leading up to 9-11 isn't some mere coincidence. That you refuse to see the clear connections is just proof of your disconnect from reality.

reply to post by GoodOlDave


Except that they continued doing business with Hitler even after the U.S. entered WW II.

www.enter.net...

After the attack on Pearl Harbor in 1941 brought the United States into the war, the close associations of so many of its leading industrialists with German firms began to catch up with them. For example, it was discovered that Standard Oil had engaged in a cartel with I.G. Farben to produce artificial rubber and gasoline from coal for the Nazis. They had renewed this agreement even after war broke out in Europe in 1939 and had supplied certain patents to the Germans while keeping them hidden from the U.S. Navy and American industry.

John D. Rockefeller, Jr., the principal owner of Standard Oil, claimed he had no involvement in day-to-day operations, leaving the blame to fall entirely on company chairman William S. Farish. Farish -- whose daughter was married to Averell Harriman's nephew -- pled "no contest" to charges of criminal conspiracy in March of 1942 and agreed to make the patents available in the US. However, fresh revelations kept coming out, and Farish was called repeatedly to testify before a Senate committee investigating national defense. His health broken by the increasingly hostile questioning, he collapsed and died of a heart attack in November 1942.

At the same time, in October of 1942, Prescott Bush was charged with running Nazi front groups, and all shares of the Union Banking Corporation were seized by the U.S. Alien Property Custodian. The elaborate system of holding companies which Bush and Harriman had created in association with the bank started unraveling as well. Things were looking very bad for the old gang.

What it clearly demonstrates is that they had no consideration of the consequences of their actions. If they hadn't financed Hitler, most likely there never would have been a WW II, and you want to pretend this is all no big deal?

These people are directly responsible for instigating the bloodiest war in human history, all for profit, and you see nothing wrong?

Some would say we got Osama Bin Laden 10 years too late, providing we did actually get Osama Bin Laden and got him when claimed.

Not only was he sadly never brought into the American Courts and made to answer for his crimes but in those long ten years hundreds of thousands of innocent civilians have died in the witch hunt for him.

It truly is a witch hunt when someone isn't brought to trial in an open court and the details of their actions made part of public proceedings.

Sadly the CIA and the Government will likely carry on this process of violating soveriegn nations, decreeing select people a menace and a threat without any due process of the law, attempting to murder them and killing anyone in the immediate vicinity in the attempts.

This isn't justice though, and it's not protecting us either, but breeding people who's injured and killed innocent relatives now have all the reason in the world to hate the arbitrary and unilatteral actions of the United States and the violence it employs in pursuing those policies.

Originally posted by poet1b
reply to post by TrickoftheShade

 

Seriously?

so I doubt a few "cleansings" would have worried anybody in 1933.

Um, yeah they did bother a great many people, leading to WW II. The first people Hitler took out when he took over the reigns of power were union leaders. This is a little known fact of history.

That you would make such an insane statement shows how disconnected from reality you are.

These business connection weren't circumstantial, they were deliberate efforts to undermine markets and rights. That the same connections are tied together from the rise of Hitler through the same groups, a constant stream of activity involving several major incidents in history all the way through leading up to 9-11 isn't some mere coincidence. That you refuse to see the clear connections is just proof of your disconnect from reality.

The clear connections aren't there. Your article stitches together hearsay and spins it with florid language, proving nothing in the process.

If you think people in the US were worried about the nazis' conduct towards minorities in 1933 then perhaps you could show me some evidence of this? Obviously a tiny number of voices on the left may have exhibited some concern, but the mainstream view was that Hitler was a positive, galvanising force for a stricken country. And also while you're at it perhaps provide some evidence that it was the treatment of Jews in the early 30s that brought the US into the war? Eight years later.

You might even like to address the main point of my post. Which is that your extracts don't supply any evidential support for their claims.

Originally posted by poet1b
If they hadn't financed Hitler, most likely there never would have been a WW II, and you want to pretend this is all no big deal?

Complete nonsense.

You appear to think that Hitler was on the phone to Prescott Bush every other day asking for a cheque to pay for some more Tiger tanks. Bush was an investor in companies that dealt with the nazis. But so were thousands of others, particularly in the US. To suggest that Bush and his associates were almost solely responsible for financing Hitler is historically illiterate.

To take that one step further and say that without their association there would have been no ww2 is moving into the realm of insanity.

Originally posted by poet1b
Can you name an independent group of engineers that back the official story, because I have yet to see any. Even the Popular Science take on the collapse doesn't support the official version.

How about two?

CTBUH (Council on Tall Buildings and Urban Habitat)

ASCE (American Society of Civil Engineers)

There you go.

Cheers!

reply to post by TrickoftheShade

Obviously a tiny number of voices on the left may have exhibited some concern, but the mainstream view was that Hitler was a positive, galvanising force for a stricken country.

Got any proof of this claim. Sounds like another of your fabrications.

Both articles list their sources. You can look this stuff up yourself, but you would rather bury your head on the sand.

These business connections are well recorded.

I can take you to the water, but I can't make you drink.

reply to post by FDNY343


Once again, independent sources.

The report put out by the appointed counsel is a joke.

This has already been pointed out.

Originally posted by poet1b
At the same time, in October of 1942, Prescott Bush was charged with running Nazi front groups, and all shares of the Union Banking Corporation were seized by the U.S. Alien Property Custodian. The elaborate system of holding companies which Bush and Harriman had created in association with the bank started unraveling as well. Things were looking very bad for the old gang.

Baloney. It was only the assets of the Nazi front companies (I forget their names but they were matitime shipping companies used to sneak German agents in) that were siezed, not the banks, and Prescott Bush was never charged with any such thing. Before the war broke out businesses were trying to court German investors because it was the middle of the depression and the Germans were the only ones who had money. When was broke out the gov't was siezing German assets all over the place, not just in Prescot Bush's bank.

What it clearly demonstrates is that they had no consideration of the consequences of their actions. If they hadn't financed Hitler, most likely there never would have been a WW II, and you want to pretend this is all no big deal?

Hitler came to power because Hitler wanted to come to power and WWII started because Hitler wanted WWII to start, and any other argument is being childish and ignorant. All of this happened before Pres. Bush and even Osama Bin Laden was born so this whole Hitler bit is as relevent to 9/11 as the English Civil War, so I will respond no more to this unproductive line of debate.

How about answering the question already- who are the remaining perps of 9/11 we need to go after?

With all the computers, videos and dvd's they seized it is a treasure chest of important information....names...addresses...bank accounts....plans to attack the U.S. again and how they were going to do it. They say Osama had no internet connections...that does make sense...but he still made plans and used a courier to relay those plans to the rest of his cohorts.......so yes...I think we may be very successful in catching the rest of them.

reply to post by GoodOlDave


Without the financing of industrialist, in which Prescott was a major player, Hitler would not have came to power. this is a historical reality. They created the monster to break the unions.

Germany's economy was doing very well before Hitler came to power. Financing Hitler was intended only for political manipulation to screw over German workers.

Here is another link that shows what these people were up to. All of this stuff can be easily looked up and verified, if you care at all about the truth.

www.spiritone.com...

reply to post by caladonea


The way they took Osama out, looks to me like they mainly wanted to silence him. It looks like no attempt was made to take him alive, which makes no sense, because he would have been a source of information.

Most likely that the people who took Osama out didn't want the information Osama could have given put out.

Originally posted by poet1b
reply to post by caladonea

 

The way they took Osama out, looks to me like they mainly wanted to silence him. It looks like no attempt was made to take him alive, which makes no sense, because he would have been a source of information.

Most likely that the people who took Osama out didn't want the information Osama could have given put out.

OR, it was because Bin Laden was holed up in a massive fortress guarded by unknown numbers of armed personnel, in a town with unknown Al Qaida loyalty, which was close to a military base that wase bound to respond immediately to a firefight nearby, in a country which the Seals were intruding into without permission, and the quickest solution involved going in and out quickly to avoid casualties and tangling with local authorities, and that necesarily meant killing him on sight. They found a gigantic amount of information and records which is way more than anything Bin Laden would have ever have admitted to so taking Bin Laden alive was of secondary importance. The primary importance is now to find out who owns the telephone numbers Bin Laden had on his cell phone.

But hey, you conspiracy people never balked at making up crap off the tops of your heads to support your conspiracy stories before, now so why let this stop you?