The Attempted American Coup d'etat..

Originally posted by psyop911
reply to post by Rising Against

 

no, you're wrong. it was 9/11. good day.

Sigh.

You didn't even read the OP, did you? And even if 9/11 was a coup of some sorts.. how does it make the original one from the 1930's wrong? That makes no sense at all.

reply to post by Asktheanimals


Absolutely it is happening again, and again we the American people have allowed it to happen. So while I find it inexcusable and down right disgusting that the congress has once again overstepped it's authority in creating the 'Dirty Dozen' I also cannot help but put some of the blame squarely on the shoulders of the our citizenry. We have in our complacency in the past allowed these actions to happen in our present and I fear that it is now too late for reversal. We learned nothing from the past and are infact, at this very moment, repeating it.

Star for you, ATA, for being on the same page here on the creation of the "Dirty Dozen" (not the co-blame on the citizens as you did not address that subject) because most people I have discussed this with have totally written off my opinions and comparisons on this subject.

Originally posted by trebmald
As FDR's "new Deal was fascist in nature in the first place (en.wikipedia.org...), why would it be necessary to cook up such a plot in the first place?

Isn't it amsuing that once some "conspiracy" is officially "uncovered", habitual conspiracists stop asking any meaningful questions and fall flat for it?

Look at how lttle evidence there is of the "Coup d'etat". Just two guys with statements completely contradicting each other. Even so, the Congressional Committee declared it true although no one named can even be prosecuted for treason since the only evidence against them was hearsay! An attempted "Coup d'etat" is declared as uncovered, no conspirators can be brought to justice and one hero! Wow!

The whole thing was a conspiracy to give FDR another term in office. As admitted in the last of the videos, FDRs policies didn't work the way expected by the people and his popularity was dropping. What better way to make him popular with the people than to pretend that the "big businesses and banks" are so against him that they were planning to stage a "Coup d'etat" to get rid of him?

Gen Butler quite likely believed what he stated. Had he agreed to lead the "Coup d'etat" he would have been "outed" and the other guy would have been the hero. Since he seemed to take too long to come out with his willingness, they came out with the committee to investigate a possible "Coup d'etat" and he played his part, although unintentionally, in shoring up FDRs popularity.

If there is a "failed conspiracy" to overthrow/assassinate Barack Obama before the next year's elections you can be sure who has been selected to be the next President

reply to post by Rising Against


Hello, RA! Once again an absolute bang up job on a thread! I want to thank you for posting this because in all actuality it is this very subject that opened my eyes after talking with a couple of friends of mine.

The more I investigated the more horrified I became at the sheer scope and magnitude of this whole topic. While the Bush's and DuPont's played a huge roll in all of it, it still goes deeper even than that.

I've been trying to plow through the book written by Jim Marrs, "Rise of the Fourth Reich" , which goes into great detail about this topic. It's one of those books that in all honesty, I cannot read too much at a time simply because at times cannot get my head around just how diabolical the plot(s) were and just how much everything is inter-connected. My copy of the book now looks more like a text book in that there are highlighted portions and notes in the margins.

So thank you again for the thread and shedding more light on a topic that most people know nothing of. S&F my friend!

reply to post by Grey Magic


Hi there Grey! I've been able to find an article written by a Washington Post reporter on the very subject of Ford and GM and their ties to Nazi Germany. I'm not sure Ford can be directly linked to the whole Coup d'Etat with FDR, however, the very fact that Ford admired so much the model of Nazi Germany tells me that he could very well have supported such a coup if it ever came to fruition.

At any rate, here is the article from the Washington Post and I would encourage you to also look into the book I mentioned in a previous post "Rise of the Fourth Reich" by Jim Marrs. I do not want to step on your own path of discovery on this topic however. I find that your own discovery of facts brings better reward, but I hope this may enable you to start your journey.

Cheers!

reply to post by Observor


Well its hard to question this, as its the truth. There are very strong NAZI ties to the Muslim Brotherhood formation, and Sharia or fundamentalism in general, setting people back, patriarchies. Nazi ties to the Pope, to Royal Families in UK and Holland, and all the leading corporate heads. Some of the military barracks are in the form of a swastika and so is an old folks home in the deep south, including the Colorado Airport, though its a 5 armed one that bears the relationship to the ancient meaning of the swastika, which symbolizes the galaxy.

There are ties to UN, Monstanto, Codex Alimentarius, to Bayers and Fritz ter Meer. Everything is tied in. Cohesively!

The fourth reicht is all around us, but its irrelvant what you call it. It's just the current form of fascism that was endorsed by the Rothchild/Rockefeller, international bankers and bloodline cartel. They like this version, they also like China's version of fascism. Its seems like those are the current models, with the SS being the biggest bullies and causing most of the earthquakes and disasters.

This is the truth, so its really not a conspiracy. And we need to stop it, big time.

On the Muslim Brotherhood/Sharia issue, just google Banna and Nazi.

Originally posted by Unity_99
reply to post by Observor

 

Well its hard to question this, as its the truth.

I am not sure what you mean by "this" which is the truth.

I believe the "Coup d'etat" against FDR was a sham. There was never a "Coup d'etat" to bring down FDR, It was always intended to be a "failed Coup d'etat" is my take. I suspect we are on the same page, but I was only trying to make sure and hence restated what I said in my earlier post.

This is the truth, so its really not a conspiracy. And we need to stop it, big time.

I am not an American and I don't believe Americans can or will do anything to stop it. You are as predictable as Pavlov's dog. The appropriate buttons will be pressed at the appropriate times to achieve the desired effect, and there is nothing you can do to change it.

Another great post RA, you're threads are always interesting and well though out.

reply to post by MyMindIsMyOwn

I've been trying to plow through the book written by Jim Marrs, "Rise of the Fourth Reich"

Hey Mind, thanks for your posts.

I'm very much so a fan of the work by Jim Marrs (particularly hen it comes to JFK research though), so I'll definitely look out for that book the next time the opportunity arises. From what you said, I'm sure it's a great read. I just see see myself messing it all up by making notes everywhere as well.

I was aware of Smedley Butler's whistleblowing on the plot to FDR -- but I'm happy that you brought it up -- I think EVERYONE needs to know how precarious and precious our Democracy was.

>> I'd always wondered how FDR got America to fight against the Germans in WW II -- once I learned that there was so much Wall Street and "Conservative" support for the Germans -- and it seems they were "convinced" to do the right thing, or they would have hung for treason.

When we "beat the Nazis" in WW II -- we didn't really catch the perpetrators BEHIND Hitler.

Prescott Bush was moving Nazis funds into the USA after the war with a Dutch Bank and had to be stopped by FDR. This family seems to be a skunk in the closet of almost every great failing in American history in the 20th century.

Nixon and George Bush Sr. were in Texas when Kennedy was assassinated, and an "agent" named George Bush flew to Washington the next day to meet with President Hoover. Although the CIA is on the record as saying it was "another agent named George Bush" without ever indicating who that was.

The FDR assassination was officially deemed a "conspiracy" and in fact two other men were prosecuted in that case -- though MOST Americans still think that anyone but a "nut" thinks there was a single shooter. When facts like; "Kennedy's brain was never recovered" -- obviously to hide the fact that his head was shot from the opposite direction -- it's obvious there was a coverup -- which would not have been necessary had we known the truth. While many historians now think that the CIA and FBI were conscientiously trying to keep the USA from going to war with Cuba (and by extension the USSR), -- I think the biggest suspect in this instance would be the Bush family -- since they had been trying to get the US to invade and kill Castro for decades -- and still are.

Three days previous to FDR's assassination, there was an incident of 3 "Cuban mafia" suspects attempting to assassinate FDR in Florida. The incident was kept hushed up so that the public at large wouldn't revisit the idea that there was a broader conspiracy to kill FDR. It only came out a few years back with a bulk of papers declassified under FOI.... but it was quickly buried again because I can no longer find the documents that I read.

Anyway,...
The Bay of Pigs incident happened just after FDR took office -- and I find it unlikely he had anything to do with the planning of it, especially when he refused to lend air support. The original CIA code name for the attack was called; "Operation Zapata." One of the boats rented for the assault was named "The Laura". The Company the boats were rented from was named "Zapata Oil." Guess who owned the oil company?

Building 7 of the WTC had the court cases for ENRON and a fraud charge for $17 Billion in fraudulent federal notes Bush family stored. The case had to be dropped, because, as we all know, that building was destroyed on September 11, 2001. We all know that "false flags" never happen in America, even though the Pentagon admitted that both the Korean and Vietnam wars were instigated by false flags. It's just important to know how CONVENIENT it was that WTC Building 7 was destroyed.


>> I could list at least a couple dozen, rotten, scummy things that the Bush family has been neck deep in -- and how they've always profited from hurting our country via their government connections. They worked with a company called "Kaplan" that does our SAT tests, and made them wealthy in our education system while doing their best to DUMB DOWN our education with "NO Child Left Behind" -- which ruined Texas' education system. It was only adopted because reporters and regulators were bribed to say that it was a success. Now, school books are getting printed more and more in Texas, with the Bush family historical and philosophical editing.

The US trades with China yet we STILL have an embargo with Cuba -- is one island of Communism that much of a threat? We buy oil from Venezuela, by the way, so apparently it's more about vindictive mobsters getting thrown out 50 years ago than anything else.

After the Katrina disaster, the Bush government made sure that the only two organizations on the ground were Blackwater (to protect the rich folks homes) and a Funeral Company out of Texas that had a history of fraud with the family. The brought in 5,000 body bags -- but the reports of actual dead were quite low, although, we still have around 10,000 people reported "missing."



>> Anything that can bring the BLIGHT of the Bush family to justice would be good in my book. This cancer on our country is long past due to be cut out.

Originally posted by Observor

Originally posted by trebmald
As FDR's "new Deal was fascist in nature in the first place (en.wikipedia.org...), why would it be necessary to cook up such a plot in the first place?

Isn't it amsuing that once some "conspiracy" is officially "uncovered", habitual conspiracists stop asking any meaningful questions and fall flat for it?

Look at how lttle evidence there is of the "Coup d'etat". Just two guys with statements completely contradicting each other. Even so, the Congressional Committee declared it true although no one named can even be prosecuted for treason since the only evidence against them was hearsay! An attempted "Coup d'etat" is declared as uncovered, no conspirators can be brought to justice and one hero! Wow!

The whole thing was a conspiracy to give FDR another term in office. As admitted in the last of the videos, FDRs policies didn't work the way expected by the people and his popularity was dropping. What better way to make him popular with the people than to pretend that the "big businesses and banks" are so against him that they were planning to stage a "Coup d'etat" to get rid of him?

Gen Butler quite likely believed what he stated. Had he agreed to lead the "Coup d'etat" he would have been "outed" and the other guy would have been the hero. Since he seemed to take too long to come out with his willingness, they came out with the committee to investigate a possible "Coup d'etat" and he played his part, although unintentionally, in shoring up FDRs popularity.

If there is a "failed conspiracy" to overthrow/assassinate Barack Obama before the next year's elections you can be sure who has been selected to be the next President

>> Wow. This "theory" of yours defies logic.
If FDR's policies DID NOT bring America out of the "Great Depression" -- then what did? If you think it was WW II -- then why did WW I hurt our economy and why did Bush's two wars RUIN our economy? It's absolute nonsense to believe that spending money on a war that produces nothing but destruction could "HELP" an economy more than public works projects that build roads, bridges and dams.

The Fascists that created the first Great Depression, have been "educating us" on our economy since the Reagan era. Low import fees on goods, tax incentives for outsourcing jobs, and no limit to compensation on the executives who "create jobs." Meanwhile the drone on the allegedly "Liberal media" of anything, ever, that a Union did that was corrupt -- regardless of whether it had bee co-opted by the companies. Lower taxes on the wealthy means LESS INVESTMENT -- and for every dollar Bush doled out in Tax Breaks -- the Wealthy in this country increased foreign investment by $2. That's right, the $750 Billion in tax breaks became over $1.4 Trillion in dollars leaving the country. I find it hard to believe this was an accident.

FDR's policies were the opposite of Reagan, Bush and now Obama+Republican's. The Bush, Ford, and other powerful Wall Street families had business with the Nazis. How can we then explain, how the USA ended up in the war against Germany?

>> There was a compelling theory, that the hatred towards the Jews in WW II in Germany, was in some extent due to a "betrayal" in WW I. Some powerful and well connected Jews pushed the USA to assist England in fighting against Germany in exchange for a homeland in Israel (as the English kind of screwed up the borders in the Middle East when they were controlling it). And again in WW II, with the help of Hollywood -- America was urged to go against Germany. ... but I really don't know enough that I could ever call "facts" to make up my mind -- anything that doesn't go 100% with the story that we all except is "anti-semitic". But, I do remember that this theory was first told to me by a very smart, Jewish businessman -- and he said that to the "true purists" there was a difference between Middle Eastern and European Jews. Hitler was "as historical fact" first bankrolled by Jewish businessmen -- who wanted to inflate the Deutschmark so that they could pay back the French with worthless paper -- until they lost control of Hitler, it worked well for them. I also note that the Likud party in Israel, acts like a bunch of fascists, and other than accent, could be hard to tell the difference from any other fascists who think they can do no wrong.

It makes some sense, however, since America stayed out of WW I and II even after England got attacked. The idea that our "treaties" got us into these doesn't make as much sense because we took so long to engage. I also note, as the US public shows amnesia, that the Bush family was very ANTI-Israel up to 9/11/2001. There was a lot of anti-semitism in America and even a refusal to help refugees up until after WW II. Nazis became the "worst thing ever" due to a lot of bad accents and plots in Hollywood movies. Though I don't like the Nazis purist philosophies -- historically, they weren't any different from wars in the 19th centuries nor were they much worse than the Japanese. But the Holocaust -- which I believe did happen -- was the "worst thing ever" -- and that's a lot to do with Hollywood.

Regardless of self-serving propaganda, however, I would argue that "Hollywood" is the best thing America ever accomplished. Where else did the "American Dream" come from? Certainly not from reality. Our "representative Democracy" has been usurped by Bankers, Steel and Railroad Tycoons, and Slave traders throughout our history.

>> However, having said all that; it STILL doesn't explain FDR's decision to move against the Germans. The US stayed neutral for the first part of the war -- DESPITE England getting into the mix. AFTER this "alleged" putsch by the economic royalists -- America gets into the war against Fascism. And I have to say, I had always scratched my head about WW II -- because throughout US history -- we've ALWAYS been at war for some corporation's profits -- they've ALL been based on lies.

The myopic view that America and Capitalism is a great and noble country that brings about prosperity, is from that moment in time when FDR pushed for the New Deal and until Carter left the White House.

>> So any Conservative who wants to tell me how GREAT America is "if only we got rid of Unions and Minimum wage" is talking of a time when it really SUCKED to be the average American. We had a 50 year golden age, which is DIRECTLY attributable to EVERYTHING Socialist and Liberal, and 450 years of "suck" that can be attributed to Economic Royalists.

I would not be surprised if FDR weren't assassinated in Warm Springs Georgia, by some of the same "Good Ol' Boys" who took out MLK. They are nothing, if not, great foot soldiers and cannon fodder.

reply to post by VitriolAndAngst


The 5 causes of the Great Depression:

1. Stock Market Crash of 1929
2. Bank Failures
3. Reduction in Purchasing Across the Board
4. American Economic Policy with Europe
5. Drought Conditions

americanhistory.about.com...

Some of these sound eerily familiar, don't you think?

The Stock Market took a huge hit over the past few years and is still stumbling through the financial quagmire.

Bank Failures? Check.

Reduction in Purchasing Power Across the Board? Yup, the USD is not what it was.

Economic Policy with Europe? Well, now it's China and the notorious Trade Imbalance.

Drought? Erm... well... it has been a rather serious heat dome over much of North America. A dust bowl it isn't quite yet, but those dust storms into Phoenix kinda makes me think.

I'd say conditions are similar to a degree and, if you'd like to extrapolate 500,000 angry vets backed by big business to the present Tea Party and their disgust with the status quo, there might be some tentative comparisons made.

Those that refuse to learn from history are bound to repeat it.

Yeah.. why are we saying this was just attempted? Did we not put Nazi sympathizer Prescott's Son AND Grandson at the head of our country? Is our country not more and more resembling a fascist state?

reply to post by GogoVicMorrow

Yeah.. why are we saying this was just attempted? Did we not put Nazi sympathizer Prescott's Son AND Grandson at the head of our country? Is our country not more and more resembling a fascist state?

Attempted: "Make an effort to achieve or complete (something, typically a difficult task or action)"*

The one from the 1930's, the vocal point of discussion here, was an attempt which seemingly failed then and there. Thus why I use the words, when discussing that coup in particular, the attempted coup.

What happened to American after (such as a Bush president) was not the discussion from the Opening Post.

reply to post by Rising Against


Thankyou so much for this post but i had known about this before but this was a great refresher. I remember when I first read it though and could not believe there were no indictments. Today I believe these elitist have had their coup d'état, though a peaceful, slow and quiet one! To think, if the Affluent were that powerful then, how would we the people of the united states possible overthrow these elitist scum that's controlling every major decision in this country and many others? I always thought that if enough of us truthers spread the word to enough americans we could change things but unfortunatly i don't believe this anymore. I feel that for a very long time Americans have been demoralized to the point of trepidation and most are afraid to act against their oppressors! As if their lives were so great that any risk is unheard of and they never believe that it's possible to change things anyway. When I hear such comments from people, I literally get sick to my stomache because I realize right there no matter how bad things get 4 out of 5 people will never stand up for themselves and while the rest of us will (in theory) I really don't know if our words will lead to actions. Once again thanx for the reminder about the dubious history thats led to our country turning from freedom to fascism in the shadows of a delinquent democracy!

reply to post by Rising Against


..Geeze dude. Give a tweak to your comprehension of context. I didn't need an explanation I was putting an idea forth in a non serious manner. Thanks for the pointless explanation though, J.


And what happened after is very much part of the discussion. To think that such an idea is just given up on and not re attempted in a less pronounced manner would be foolish.

You don't think it would be possible that his son and grandson who would both be very knowledgeable on his ideas might not be sympathetic to the philosophy and cause? We aren't talking about a distant relative here. They at some point shared a home and life.

Originally posted by VitriolAndAngst
>> Wow. This "theory" of yours defies logic.
If FDR's policies DID NOT bring America out of the "Great Depression" -- then what did? If you think it was WW II -- then why did WW I hurt our economy and why did Bush's two wars RUIN our economy? It's absolute nonsense to believe that spending money on a war that produces nothing but destruction could "HELP" an economy more than public works projects that build roads, bridges and dams.

First off, my "theory" was not about whether FDR's policies brought the US out of the depression or not. It was about whether there was such a huge disagreement about FDR's policies amongst the big business and banks that they wanted to launch a coup against the system. With term limits in place it is a ridiculous suggestion that businesses that are housed in the country would attempt a coup against the system, instead of biding their time to put in place their man. If the incumbent is considered so dangerous that he cannot be allowed to finish his term(s), assassination is a much easier and less risky option than a coup.

FDR did not take the US$ off the gold standard, the supposed motivation for the plotters of the coup. He simply disallowed US residents from holding gold, which meant they could not redeem their currency for gold at a bank as long as the EO was in force, an easily reversible step.

If there was a real attempted coup, FDR who survived it would have had every incentive to go after the plotters with everything he got and he would have had the justification for it too: after all, high treason is no laughing matter. Yet, he chose not to and did not even make an attempt to get at the alleged plotters. Which means the "coup" was never meant to be and probably FDR was in on it too. There was only one purpose to the "attempted coup", project FDR as a hero who was fighting the big business and banks for the people. It was needed because the immediate impact of FDR's policies did not win him enough public approval to assure another term in office, which was needed to continue the policies.

I believe in demand-side economics myself and am quite sure the US would have pulled out of the great depression whether there was a WW II or not. However, the war accelerated US economic recovery, because it created a demand for US goods and services. Yes, war causes destruction. But WW II was not fought on US soil so any destruction because of the war did not cause a cost to the US. As the US had the resources necessary to increase production several times, but couldn't do so only because of a lack of demand, the demand created by the war helped the US economy.

The Fascists that created the first Great Depression, have been "educating us" on our economy since the Reagan era. Low import fees on goods, tax incentives for outsourcing jobs, and no limit to compensation on the executives who "create jobs." Meanwhile the drone on the allegedly "Liberal media" of anything, ever, that a Union did that was corrupt -- regardless of whether it had bee co-opted by the companies. Lower taxes on the wealthy means LESS INVESTMENT -- and for every dollar Bush doled out in Tax Breaks -- the Wealthy in this country increased foreign investment by $2. That's right, the $750 Billion in tax breaks became over $1.4 Trillion in dollars leaving the country. I find it hard to believe this was an accident.

The great depression was certainly engineered, but not to "loot" anyone of their wealth, but to make public accept a fiat currency which alone had the capacity to allow a nation reach its economic potential, since it didn't tie down the money supply to available gold.

FDR's policies were the opposite of Reagan, Bush and now Obama+Republican's. The Bush, Ford, and other powerful Wall Street families had business with the Nazis. How can we then explain, how the USA ended up in the war against Germany?

Businesses do business with anyone who can pay. They are not really interested in the ideologies. They did business with the the allies too, not just Nazi Germany. Regardless of which side the US took or not, they were going to lose some/all customers when the war ends. That is why the cold-war was initiated as soon as WW II ended: to keep these businesses in business.

reply to post by GogoVicMorrow

And what happened after is very much part of the discussion. To think that such an idea is just given up on and not re attempted in a less pronounced manner would be foolish.

Ok, you're not quite getting this..

I mean It was not part of my opening post. I wanted to primarily discuss and focus on the coup itself, not what happened after. Even so..

You don't think it would be possible that his son and grandson who would both be very knowledgeable on his ideas might not be sympathetic to the philosophy and cause?

If you read the Opening post, you'd know I briefly mentioned this as I found it particularly odd, personally. Here's what I said exactly:

"Isn't it amazing? In this democratic world we are said to live in, and in the "land of the free" of all places, the son and grandson of the man who seemingly helped in organizing a coup d’état against the then President of the United States, as well as being well known to have helped in funding the Nazi regime, both became presidents themselves.. Perhaps this is also quite a cause for concern."

Get it now?

reply to post by Rising Against


OK.. whatever you say.
I gotta say taking time off the topic to scold people for tossing out an opinion isn't a great way to stop your thread from being derailed by every opinion you don't want posted in your thread.

If you are afraid the discussion might go elsewhere you are taking this too serious.
ls m spr hgh

reply to post by GogoVicMorrow

I gotta say taking time off the topic to scold people for tossing out an opinion isn't a great way to stop your thread from being derailed by every opinion you don't want posted in your thread.

lol, wow, yet another post here you completely fail to understand, even when I damn near spelled it out for you.

Sigh. Here it is yet again: I don't mind what people discuss in the thread. The Opening post however, which I've explained a couple of times to you already now, is where I wanted to discuss the coup itself as opposed to focusing on what happened after it, such as a Bush family member becoming president. Feel free to discuss it now, but my point is, and always has been, I never discussed it in great detail in the first post as the coup itself was where I wanted discussion to stem from.

Why is this so difficult for you to understand? I'm not stopping anyone from discussing anything here. You do realize I can't moderate this thread, right? And stop tryin to act like a victim. I haven't "scolded" anyone for any opinion. I've barely even posted in this thread, which is unusual for me, as I wanted to hear the opinions of other people.

Claiming I'm attempting to stop people giving their opinion is a laughable claim.