'little hitler'

topic posted Mon, July 23, 2007 - 3:55 PM by  d'zoner
Share/Save/Bookmark
Advertisement
interesting.

this just came to me out of the ether.

after looking it over, i hereby predict that, following an 'incident' and after declaring a national emergency and attempt a police state, and following catastrophic chaos, turmoil, mass imprisonments, exonomic meltdown and a power struggle that basically becomes a civil war, bush will widely come to be known as the 'little hitler'.

a rare honor, in it's own way. it's own very very bad way.
posted by:
d'zoner
Advertisement
Advertisement
  • Re: 'little hitler'

    Mon, July 23, 2007 - 4:19 PM
    I predict that elections will happen and Bush will be thereafter known as Lil Dumbass....
    • Re: 'little hitler'

      Wed, July 25, 2007 - 12:52 PM
      "I predict that elections will happen and Bush will be thereafter known as Lil Dumbass...."

      Much more likely. The Hitler comparisons are so ridiculous and historically ignorant.
  • Re: 'little hitler'

    Mon, July 23, 2007 - 4:36 PM
    same people behind hitler are behind bush.

    just another coincidence im sure.
    • Re: 'little hitler'

      Mon, July 23, 2007 - 4:43 PM
      <<same people behind hitler are behind bush.

      What same people Sean? Please fill us in on this revelation.
      • Re: 'little hitler'

        Mon, July 23, 2007 - 5:35 PM
        You can't be serious Jeff?
        This Tribe has brought up NUMEROUS Articles and direct links to the Bush Dynasty and it's direct Links to Hitler's Nazi Germany ..and discussed this at LENGTH!.
        Sometimes I wonder if you aren't living your young life in a "Protected Lexan Bubble"...time to wake UP and burst it Jeff!
        • Re: 'little hitler'

          Mon, July 23, 2007 - 5:47 PM
          elections will occur and bush will then have to be reviled from afar... i want someone to save all of these types of threads.... weren't we already supposed to be at war with iran by now?
        • Re: 'little hitler'

          Mon, July 23, 2007 - 5:50 PM
          haha Jake, either he will never get it, doesnt want to get it, or is making money off of it.
          • Re: 'little hitler'

            Tue, July 24, 2007 - 9:15 AM
            Come on Sean, I challenge you to back up your assertion. Show me how the same people behind Hitler are behind Goerge bush. You do realize the people behind hitler are dead don't you?
          • Re: 'little hitler'

            Tue, July 24, 2007 - 10:15 AM
            <<or is making money off of it.

            LMFAO! You really are paranoid Sean, wow! Is Bush also paying me to oppose 98% of his policies?
            • Re: 'little hitler'

              Tue, July 24, 2007 - 10:22 AM
              Yes Jeff, I can tell that you are a huge Bush apologist. Hopefully you don't have ties to Bush, Hitler and Ghengis Khan too.

              don't you know, DNA evidence has linked George Bush to Ghengis Khan. It's true!! I swear!!
              • Re: 'little hitler'

                Wed, July 25, 2007 - 6:17 AM
                >>don't you know, DNA evidence has linked George Bush to Ghengis Khan. It's true!! I swear!!

                As usual, truth is stranger than your idiotic attempts at fictional humor.

                "All family trees take surprising twists and turns. But for sheer irony, nothing can match the paradox linking Dracula to Bush and Kerry. As illustrated above, the common link is the Royal House of Windsor – an ancient line that descends from princes and spawned generations of American elite."
                landing.msn.ancestry.com/famou...c.aspx
        • Re: 'little hitler'

          Tue, July 24, 2007 - 9:14 AM
          <<You can't be serious Jeff?

          Typical empty response from you, no substance, no demonstration of the claim. I have read the threads, and to say there are DIRECT links is a huge stretch of the imagination. In addition, he said the "same people behind hitler are behind Bush". Really? What same people? Please show me these same people. Give us something of substance for once Jake.
        • Re: 'little hitler'

          Tue, July 24, 2007 - 9:17 AM
          <<This Tribe has brought up NUMEROUS Articles and direct links to the Bush Dynasty and it's direct Links to Hitler's Nazi Germany

          In addition, he did not say "Bush Dynasty". He said SAME people behind hitler are the SAME people behind BUSH. He said nothing about the Bush dynasty and how they made their money with INDIRECT links.
          • Re: 'little hitler'

            Tue, July 24, 2007 - 11:19 AM
            You all do understand that before we fought in WWII, Nazi Germany was considered a good investment. The bush dynasty did what many others were doing, investing their $$ in companies that would give them a return on their investment. That does not = PEOPLE BEHIND HITLER WERE PEOPLE BEHIND GEORGE BUSH.
            • Re: 'little hitler'

              Wed, July 25, 2007 - 6:28 AM
              >>You all do understand that before we fought in WWII, Nazi Germany was considered a good investment. The bush dynasty did what many others were doing, investing their $$ in companies that would give them a return on their investment. That does not = PEOPLE BEHIND HITLER WERE PEOPLE BEHIND GEORGE BUSH.

              And you do understand that many industrialists and financiers maintained those ties WHILE we fought in WWII. Maybe that's why Prescott's assets were seized under the "*Trading With The Enemy* Act."

              "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."
              www.corpwatch.org/article.php

              Shit... Ford used labor from the Buchenwald camp.

              But hey... pay it no mind... it was just a "good investment."
              • Re: 'little hitler'

                Wed, July 25, 2007 - 9:40 AM
                <<And you do understand that many industrialists and financiers maintained those ties WHILE we fought in WWII. Maybe that's why Prescott's assets were seized under the "*Trading With The Enemy* Act."

                I understand that. I am demonstrating a motive of greed as opposed to a motive of ideological commonality between Nazis and the Bush family. The claim was made that the same people behind Hitler are behind George Bush, the implication being that Nazi supporters also support Bush. Nothing could be further from the truth, those "same people" are dead. and a direct link to George Bush and Nazis? Really? The simple fact is that GWs grandfather married in to a family, his father in law gave him a job and assigned him to the German branch before the rise of Hitler. This company continued to do business in Germany as Hitler rose to power, Prescott owned 1 Share in that company. Now how exactly is that a direct link to GW Bush and Nazis?
    • Re: 'little hitler'

      Tue, July 24, 2007 - 9:24 AM
      <<same people behind hitler are behind bush.

      just another coincidence im sure. >>


      You conspiracy people are comical.

      On the one hand you talk about Bush's "hitler connections" and in the same breath talk about how Israel runs US policy. No contradiction here!

      Bwhaaaa!!
      • Re: 'little hitler'

        Tue, July 24, 2007 - 10:19 AM
        Bush is a Nazi that loves to promote the Jewish Agenda! LOL!

        Seriously, what I see happening over and over on this tribe is that people are so blinded by their hatred of Bush that conjecture, assumption, and outright lies are being presented as fact. I hate the fucker too, but I believe it is important for us to be factual with our claims thereby legitimizing the progressive cause.
  • Re: 'little hitler'

    Mon, July 23, 2007 - 6:13 PM
    That's so cool, man. You have a rare intuitive gift.
    • Re: 'little hitler'

      Mon, July 23, 2007 - 7:03 PM
      Oh my! Why thank you, but I should not be credited for "The bookmark thread".
      It was DVD burner that created it darling.
      • Re: 'little hitler'

        Mon, July 23, 2007 - 9:37 PM
        <Oh my! Why thank you, but I should not be credited for "The bookmark thread".
        It was DVD burner that created it darling.>

        have you tried the 'threaded' option?

        darling.
        • Re: 'little hitler'

          Mon, July 23, 2007 - 10:19 PM
          Yes, I was heaping praise on d'zoner's intuitive ability to see around corners into the future. And, oh my, what he sees. A simian in a gold-braided uniform and shiny black boots demanding tribute and obedience from throngs of millions on pain of death, while slaughtering tens of millions in service of his demon-seed vision of a perfect world.
          • Re: 'little hitler'

            Mon, July 23, 2007 - 11:28 PM
            <Yes, I was heaping praise on d'zoner's intuitive ability to see around corners into the future. And, oh my, what he sees. A simian in a gold-braided uniform and shiny black boots demanding tribute and obedience from throngs of millions on pain of death, while slaughtering tens of millions in service of his demon-seed vision of a perfect world. >

            ah, you've read my commentaries.

            i was wonderig what you might be trying to convey with that cryptic brevity.

            the 'a simian in ...' expansion beggared for quality, however. is that really the best you could come up with?

            • Re: 'little hitler'

              Tue, July 24, 2007 - 9:17 AM
              <<s that really the best you could come up with? >>

              I was a little pressed for time. I'm sure you could improve upon it immeasurably.
              • Re: 'little hitler'

                Tue, July 24, 2007 - 9:20 AM
                The aforementioned simian: people.tribe.net/17c6f738-...9b5af2f741
                • Re: 'little hitler'

                  Tue, July 24, 2007 - 9:24 AM
                  Did you know that Hitler had a framed photograph of Henry Ford on his desk from the time he was elected chancellor until the day that war was declared between the US and Germany? He then moved the photograph to another location in his office.
                  • This is the maximum depth. Additional responses will not be threaded.

                    Re: 'little hitler'

                    Tue, July 24, 2007 - 10:28 AM
                    <<Did you know that Hitler had a framed photograph of Henry Ford on his desk from the time he was elected chancellor until the day that war was declared between the US and Germany? >>

                    Henry Ford helped finance Hitler. As did Prescott Bush.
                    • Re: 'little hitler'

                      Tue, July 24, 2007 - 2:09 PM
                      Jimi, I think it is more accurate to say that they invested in german companies and german stock, something many Americans did BEFORE WWII because you could get a good return on their investment. I think it is dishonest to say that Bush and Ford FINANCED Hitler, it does not tell the whole story. You are making it sound like both those guys were Nazis, loved Hitler, and chose out of the goodness of their hearts to finance the man. Nothing could be further from the truth.
                      • Re: 'little hitler'

                        Tue, July 24, 2007 - 2:36 PM
                        Prescott Bush and Henry Ford qualify as Nazis, morally speaking.
                        • Re: 'little hitler'

                          Tue, July 24, 2007 - 3:27 PM
                          And their actions that are equal to genocide of millions of jews are what exactly?
                          • Re: 'little hitler'

                            Tue, July 24, 2007 - 4:03 PM
                            No equivalence needed - they were accomplices to that crime, directly. Surely you've heard of accomplices to being convicted for aiding and abetting a crime?

                            Oh I forgot, that kind of logic only applies to normal schmoes. Rich white guys with fancy pedigrees cannot be guilty, by definition.
                            • Re: 'little hitler'

                              Tue, July 24, 2007 - 5:03 PM
                              <<No equivalence needed - they were accomplices to that crime, directly. Surely you've heard of accomplices to being convicted for aiding and abetting a crime?

                              Surely you understand what an accomplice to a crime is don't you? Investing in companies that exist in a country that was later found out to be comitting genocide does not make a person an accomplice to genocide. You are letting your hatred for Bush cloud your logic.
                              • Re: 'little hitler'

                                Tue, July 24, 2007 - 7:04 PM
                                Hitler's genocidal schemes were an open secret in the late 1930s. Prescott Bush was convicted (according to wikipedia) thusly:

                                "On October 20, 1942, the U.S. government ordered the seizure of Nazi German banking operations in New York City. President Franklin Roosevelt's Alien Property Custodian, Leo T. Crowley, signed Vesting Order Number 248 seizing the property of Prescott Bush under the Trading with the Enemy Act."

                                Surely you're not suggesting that nobody knew of Hitler's genocidal schemes by 1942?!?

                                You are letting your desire to be a good little centrist liberal cloud your logic.
                                • Re: 'little hitler'

                                  Wed, July 25, 2007 - 9:47 AM
                                  <<Hitler's genocidal schemes were an open secret in the late 1930s.

                                  The true extent of Hitlers Genocide was not known until we liberated the starving Jews from their camps

                                  <<Prescott Bush was convicted (according to wikipedia) thusly:

                                  I know all about it, I am not defending Prescotts greed. But how does this = "the same people behind Hitler are the same people behind GW Bush"? How is that a direct link from Bush to Nazis? Seems pretty indirect to me being that these were the actions of his Grandfather.
                              • Re: 'little hitler'

                                Wed, July 25, 2007 - 8:31 AM
                                Surely you understand what an accomplice to a crime is don't you? Investing in companies that exist in a country that was later found out to be comitting genocide does not make a person an accomplice to genocide. You are letting your hatred for Bush cloud your logic."

                                There is no "later found out." The Bush family knew damn well who they were supplying and it took the Trading With the Enemy Act to stop them and it didn't entirely do that.
                                • Re: 'little hitler'

                                  Wed, July 25, 2007 - 10:05 AM
                                  I never said they did not know who they were supplying. The claim was made that Prescott is an accessory to Hitlers genocide. Americans heard rumors of the camps in 1933. Correct me if I am wrong, but I don't beleive that the extent of genocide was known until the first camp was liberated by the Russians. Maybe more was known before then, but it is not how I remember it.
                                  • Re: 'little hitler'

                                    Wed, July 25, 2007 - 11:39 AM
                                    No, thats incorrect from what I've read (yes this does seem to be a somewhat controversial topic). It seems to be an open secret that Hitler had his camps. Certainly it was known by 1940-42 timeframe. Its very probably Prescott knew what was happening.

                                    Anyway why is it so hard for you to believe it, Jeff? US business supports genocidal maniacs all the time. Saddam, Suharto, Ceaucesceau, etc. ad nauseum.
                                    • Re: 'little hitler'

                                      Wed, July 25, 2007 - 12:47 PM
                                      << It seems to be an open secret that Hitler had his camps.

                                      I understand this. But was it an open secret that he was burning the people in the camps in ovens? Remember, we had our own camps with the Japanese as well, and as disgusting as these American camps were, we did not engage in genocide. It is not the existence of camps that I am disputing being known, it is the extent of the genocide.

                                      And no, it is not hard to believe.
                        • Re: 'little hitler'

                          Tue, July 24, 2007 - 3:33 PM
                          <<Prescott Bush and Henry Ford qualify as Nazis, morally speaking. >>


                          Hopefully you don't have any investments in defence contractors. I guess that would make you as guilty.
                          • Re: 'little hitler'

                            Tue, July 24, 2007 - 4:04 PM
                            Certainly not, I'd never knowingly do so. Its possible some index fund or something does but I'd never put my money into those vipers directly.
                      • You forgot this little part

                        Tue, July 24, 2007 - 4:39 PM
                        How Bush's grandfather helped Hitler's rise to power


                        Rumours of a link between the US first family and the Nazi war machine have circulated for decades. Now the Guardian can reveal how repercussions of events that culminated in action under the Trading with the Enemy Act are still being felt by today's president

                        Ben Aris in Berlin and Duncan Campbell in Washington
                        Saturday September 25, 2004
                        The Guardian

                        George Bush's grandfather, the late US senator Prescott Bush, was a director and shareholder of companies that profited from their involvement with the financial backers of Nazi Germany.

                        The Guardian has obtained confirmation from newly discovered files in the US National Archives that a firm of which Prescott Bush was a director was involved with the financial architects of Nazism.

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

                        Article continues
                        The evidence has also prompted one former US Nazi war crimes prosecutor to argue that the late senator's action should have been grounds for prosecution for giving aid and comfort to the enemy.

                        The debate over Prescott Bush's behaviour has been bubbling under the surface for some time. There has been a steady internet chatter about the "Bush/Nazi" connection, much of it inaccurate and unfair. But the new documents, many of which were only declassified last year, show that even after America had entered the war and when there was already significant information about the Nazis' plans and policies, he worked for and profited from companies closely involved with the very German businesses that financed Hitler's rise to power.

                        www.guardian.co.uk/usa/stor...0,00.html


                        Now how exectly do you know what they did or did not do and for what motive?

                        Provide a link to you claim just one link Jeff.

                        You are always carrying on about how you do "research" well show us what is up your sleeve.

                        I guess your "research" is better than the Guardian's.
                        • Re: You forgot this little part

                          Tue, July 24, 2007 - 5:08 PM
                          Sometimes my research actually is better than the Guardian. Case in point, I was easily able to figure out that the American Hospital of Dubai was called such because it was up to American standards, not because it was an American hospital. The Guardian did not figure out that distinction. If you have not been paying attention, the media has been laying down on the job.

                          I don't need a source to know that Prescott Bush's motivations were money, that is why people make investments that give them a good return. Germany at the time was giving back good returns.

                          I will be back with my other sources...
                          • Re: You forgot this little part

                            Tue, July 24, 2007 - 5:23 PM
                            Now, here is some information from a site that is critical of the Bush Nazi ties. This portion is a demonstration that the investments began before Hitlers rise and thus could not have been because of ideological ties. It was about $$ pure and simple.

                            "In 1924, Harriman and Walker set up the Union Banking Corporation, whose primary purpose was to funnel American capital to German industry. Walker was president of the company, and Harriman its chief stockholder. In just one three-year period, the Harriman firm sold more than $50 million of German bonds to American investors.

                            It is important to remember, however, that during these initial years of operation, Union Banking was primarily doing business with non-Nazi Germans. "
                            www.911-strike.com/bush-nazi.htm

                            His hands are a little dirtier than I rememberd, but his evil was one of greed and $$, not Nazi ideological affinity.
                            • Re: You forgot this little part

                              Tue, July 24, 2007 - 5:29 PM
                              "There was nothing illegal in doing business with the Thyssens throughout the 1930s and many of America's best-known business names invested heavily in the German economic recovery. However, everything changed after Germany invaded Poland in 1939. Even then it could be argued that BBH was within its rights continuing business relations with the Thyssens until the end of 1941 as the US was still technically neutral until the attack on Pearl Harbor. The trouble started on July 30 1942 when the New York Herald-Tribune ran an article entitled "Hitler's Angel Has $3m in US Bank". UBC's huge gold purchases had raised suspicions that the bank was in fact a "secret nest egg" hidden in New York for Thyssen and other Nazi bigwigs. The Alien Property Commission (APC) launched an investigation.

                              There is no dispute over the fact that the US government seized a string of assets controlled by BBH - including UBC and SAC - in the autumn of 1942 under the Trading with the Enemy act. What is in dispute is if Harriman, Walker and Bush did more than own these companies on paper. "

                              The Anti-Defamation League in the US is supportive of Prescott Bush and the Bush family. In a statement last year they said that "rumours about the alleged Nazi 'ties' of the late Prescott Bush ... have circulated widely through the internet in recent years. These charges are untenable and politically motivated ... Prescott Bush was neither a Nazi nor a Nazi sympathiser."

                              www.freerepublic.com/focus/f...01/posts

                              In addition, Prescott was nothing but a tire salesman when he married in to the Walker family. He was given his job by his father in law and only had 1 share in the company. en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Prescott_Bush

                              I have no doubt that the family is greedy and power hungry, their history demonstrates this. But I also think it is disingenuous to try and indicate that Bush has ideological ties with Nazis.
                              • Re: You forgot this little part

                                Tue, July 24, 2007 - 6:57 PM
                                No offense but the wikipedia link does nothing for me. As I can and do make edits there I know that someone can put up stuff and until someone comes and changes it there it is........

                                Now here is some background that is a bit different.

                                Prescott Sheldon Bush was born in Columbus, Ohio, on 15th May, 1895. Like his grandfather, James Smith Bush, he went to Yale University in 1913. While at university he became a member of the Skull and Bones Secret Society. A fellow member was E. Roland Harriman, the younger brother of W. Averell Harriman.

                                His father, Samuel Prescott Bush became General Manager of Buckeye Steel Castings Company, which manufactured railway parts, in 1901. The company was run by Frank Rockefeller, the brother of oil magnate John D. Rockefeller, and among its clients were the railroads controlled by E. H. Harriman. In 1908 Rockefeller retired and Bush became President of Buckeye.

                                Samuel Prescott Bush was also closely associated with Samuel Pryor, who, along with the Rockefellers, controlled the Remington Arms Company. During the First World War, Clarence Dillion, a senior figure at the War Industries Board, arranged for Bush, to become chief of the Ordnance Small Arms and Ammunition Section of the WIB. This involved giving out contracts to supply arms and ammunition to the United States Army. Over half of the small-arms ammunition and 69% of the rifles used by the United States in the war were supplied by Remington.

                                On 8th August, 1918, the Ohio State Journal reported that Prescott Bush had been awarded the "cross of the Legion of Honor, the Victoria Cross and the Distinguished Service Cross." The report added; "The incident occurred on the western front about the time the Germans were launching their great offensive of July 15... The history of the remarkable victory scored later by the allies might have been written in another vein, but for the heroic and quick action of Captain Bush."

                                Apparently, this information came from his mother Flora Bush. In fact, at this time, Bush had yet to see action on the Western Front. A month later the Ohio State Journal had to report that it was a victim of a hoax. His mother wrote to the paper and apologized for providing this false information. She claimed that she had been fooled by a letter she had received from her son that had been "written in a spirit of fun".

                                In 1919 Bush was introduced by W. Averell Harriman to his business partner, George Herbert Walker. Later that year, Bush was introduced to Walker's daughter, Dorothy. The couple married in August, 1921. Bush and his new wife moved to Columbus, Ohio, and went to work for his father's family business.

                                In 1926, Bush's father-in-law, appointed him vice-president of W. A. Harriman & Company. This company had made considerable investments in Germany. At the end of the war, the commercial steamships of Hamburg-Amerika were confiscated by the United States government. As the authors of George Bush: The Unauthorized Biography have pointed out: "These ships had then become the property of the Harriman enterprise, by some arrangements with the U.S. authorities that were never made public." In doing so, Harriman created the world's largest private shipping line.

                                Samuel Pryor, the chairman of Remington Arms, and George Herbert Walker, both became directors of the American Ship and Commerce Company, Harriman's shipping front organization. Walker and Harriman set up their European headquarters in Berlin. With the help of the Warburg Bank, W. A. Harriman began to invest heavily in German industry.

                                In 1926 Prescott Bush became vice president of W. A. Harriman & Company. Soon afterwards the company expanded into the Soviet Union. After negotiations with Leon Trotsky and Felix Dzerzhinsky, Harriman obtained a contract to mine manganese. In 1927 the company was criticized for its support of totalitarian governments in Italy and the Soviet Union. George Herbert Walker wrote to W. Averell Harriman pointing out that "the suggestion... that we withdraw from Russia smacks some what of the impertinent.. I think that we have drawn our line and should hew to it" (11th August, 1927).

                                W. Averell Harriman also formed a partnership with the German industrialist, Fritz Thyssen. In 1926 Harriman and Clarence Dillon of Dillon Read Company helped Thyssen and Friedrich Flick to establish the German Steel Trust. According to Anton Chaitkin: "The Flick-Harriman partnership was directly supervised by Prescott Bush". Dillon Read provided two representatives to the board of the German Steel Trust and took responsibility for its corporate banking.

                                In 1928 Thyssen formed United Steelworks, a company that controlled more that 75 per cent of Germany's ore reserves and employed 200,000 people. Thyssen started a joint-venture with Harriman called the Union Banking Corporation. This was used to transfer funds between the United States and Germany. In 1931 W.A. Harriman & Company merged with the British-American banking house Brown Brothers. Prescott Bush, along with W. Averell Harriman, E. Roland Harriman and George Herbert Walker, became managing partners in the new company, Brown Brothers Harriman. This was to develop into the most important private banking house in America.

                                Prescott Bush was appointed as a director of the Harriman Fifteen Corporation. This in turn controlled the Consolidated Silesian Steel Corporation, that owned one-third of a complex of steel-making, coal-mining and zinc-mining activities in Germany and Poland. Friedrich Flick owned the other two-thirds of the operation. Flick was a leading financial supporter of the Nazi Party and in the 1930s donated over seven million marks to the party. A close friend of Heinrich Himmler, Flick also gave the Schutz Staffeinel (SS) 10,000 marks a year.

                                Fritz Thyssen was also one of the leading backers of the Nazi Party. In 1931 he recruited Hjalmar Schacht to the cause and in November, 1932, the two men joined with other industrialists in signing the letter that urged Paul von Hindenburg to appoint Adolf Hitler as chancellor. This was successful and on 20th February, 1933, they arranged a meeting of the Association of German Industrialists that raised 3 million marks for the Nazi Party in the forthcoming election.

                                On 27th February, 1933, someone set fire to the Reichstag. Several people were arrested including a leading, Georgi Dimitrov, general secretary of the Comintern, the international communist organization. Dimitrov was eventually acquitted but a young man from the Netherlands, Marianus van der Lubbe, was eventually executed for the crime. As a teenager Lubbe had been a communist and Hermann Goering used this information to claim that the Reichstag Fire was part of a KPD plot to overthrow the government.

                                Hitler gave orders that all leaders of the German Communist Party should "be hanged that very night." Paul von Hindenburg vetoed this decision but did agree that Hitler should take "dictatorial powers". KPD candidates in the election were arrested and Hermann Goering announced that the Nazi Party planned "to exterminate" German communists. Thousands of members of the Social Democrat Party and Communist Party were arrested and sent to recently opened to concentration camps.

                                Left-wing election meetings were broken up by the Sturm Abteilung (SA) and several candidates were murdered. Newspapers that supported these political parties were closed down during the 1933 General Election. Although it was extremely difficult for the opposition parties to campaign properly, Hitler and the Nazi party still failed to win an overall victory in the election on 5th March, 1933. The NSDAP received 43.9% of the vote and only 288 seats out of the available 647. The increase in the Nazi vote had mainly come from the Catholic rural areas who feared the possibility of an atheistic Communist government.

                                After the 1933 General Election Hitler proposed an Enabling Bill that would give him dictatorial powers. Such an act needed three-quarters of the members of the Reichstag to vote in its favour. All the active members of the Communist Party, were in concentration camps, in hiding, or had left the country (an estimated 60,000 people left Germany during the first few weeks after the election). This was also true of most of the leaders of the other left-wing party, Social Democrat Party (SDP). However, Hitler still needed the support of the Catholic Centre Party (BVP) to pass this legislation. Hitler therefore offered the BVP a deal: vote for the bill and the Nazi government would guarantee the rights of the Catholic Church. The BVP agreed and when the vote was taken, only 94 members of the SDP voted against the Enabling Bill.

                                Adolf Hitler was now the dictator of Germany. Fritz Thyssen now joined with W. Averell Harriman to establish credit for the new government. He later admitted that he told Hitler's deputy, Rudolph Hess, that he would do this via BHS, a Dutch bank that he had established with Harriman. "I chose a Dutch bank because I did not want to be mixed up with German banks... it was better to business with a Dutch bank, and I thought I would have the Nazis a little more in my hands."

                                Albert Voegler, the chief executive of the German Steel Trust was also a director of BHS Bank in Rotterdam. Voegler was also a director of the Harriman-Bush owned Hamburg-Amerika shipping line. He was another leading financial supporter of Adolf Hitler and the Nazi Party.

                                Max Warburg was also appointed as a director of Hamburg-Amerika. Warburg wrote to W. Averell Harriman on 27th March, 1933, assuring him that Hitler was good for Germany. However, he was concerned about the "very active propaganda against Germany" that was taking place in the United States. Four days later, the American Jewish Committee, controlled by the Warburgs, issued a statement asking "that no American boycott against Germany be encouraged" and advising "that no further mass meetings be held or similar forms of agitation be employed".

                                In May 1933, the Harriman International Company, became the head of a syndicate of 150 firms and individuals to conduct all exports from Hitler's Germany to the United States. The agreement had been negotiated by John Foster Dulles and Hitler's economic minister, Hjalmar Schacht. Dulles was the international attorney for several Nazi enterprises and in September, 1937, he wrote to Prescott Bush about the German Atlantic Cable Company, that owned Nazi Germany's only telegraph channel to the United States.

                                In 1934 Prescott Bush sent W. Averell Harriman an article that appeared in the 19th March edition of the New York Times. The article claimed that the Polish government intended to take action against the Upper Silesian Coal and Steel Company because it was controlling 45% of its steel production. The newspaper reported that "two-thirds of the company's stock is owned by Friedrich Flick, a leading German steel industrialist, and the remainder is owned by interests in the United States". This of course was Bush, Harriman and Walker. The Polish government complained that the owners of the Upper Silesian Coal and Steel Company were guilty of tax evasion. They were also responsible for using Poland's raw materials to provide for the military needs of Nazi Germany.

                                Prescott Bush's business interests in Germany suffered after the outbreak of the Second World War. On 20th October, 1942, the United States government seized the assets of the Union Banking Corporation. The shares of the bank were owned by Prescott Bush, E. Roland Harriman, and a couple of members of the Nazi Party. Under the Trading with the Enemy Act, the government took over the Union Banking Corporation and the Silesian-American Corporation, a company that had been managed by Prescott Bush and his father-in-law George Herbert Walker.

                                www.spartacus.schoolnet.co.uk/MDb....htm
                                • Re: You forgot this little part

                                  Wed, July 25, 2007 - 10:18 AM
                                  <<No offense but the wikipedia link does nothing for me.

                                  Do you have something from the link that you dispute? If so, state it.

                                  <<Now here is some background that is a bit different.

                                  What exactly is different? Looks the same to me.
                              • Re: You forgot this little part

                                Tue, July 24, 2007 - 7:04 PM
                                ......Bush has ideological ties with Nazis.

                                No it is worse just plain greed.....................
                                • Re: You forgot this little part

                                  Wed, July 25, 2007 - 10:22 AM
                                  <<No it is worse just plain greed.....................

                                  That is what I have been saying. What was said above was that the people behind Hitler are the same people behind Bush and they Bush has direct links to Nazis. When in reality, we are talking about the actions of his grandfather, actions that were motivated by $$ and greed rather than ideology. The people behind Hitler are dead, how can they be behind GW?
                                  • Document uncovers details of a planned coup in the USA in 1933 by right-wing American businessmen
                                    View a picture gallery of images related to this edition.

                                    The coup was aimed at toppling President Franklin D Roosevelt with the help of half-a-million war veterans. The plotters, who were alleged to involve some of the most famous families in America, (owners of Heinz, Birds Eye, Goodtea, Maxwell Hse & George Bush’s Grandfather, Prescott) believed that their country should adopt the policies of Hitler and Mussolini to beat the great depression.

                                    Mike Thomson investigates why so little is known about this biggest ever peacetime threat to American democracy.

                                    www.bbc.co.uk/radio4/hist...070723.shtml

                                    A BBC Radio 4 investigation sheds new light on a major subject that has received little historical attention, the conspiracy on behalf of a group of influential powerbrokers, led by Prescott Bush, to overthrow FDR and implement a fascist dictatorship in the U.S. based around the ideology of Mussolini and Hitler.

                                    In 1933, Marine Corps Maj.-Gen. Smedley Butler was approached by a wealthy and secretive group of industrialists and bankers, including Prescott Bush the current President's grandfather, who asked him to command a 500,000 strong rogue army of veterans that would help stage a coup to topple then President Franklin Delano Roosevelt.

                                    According to the BBC, the plotters intended to impose a fascist takeover and "Adopt the policies of Hitler and Mussolini to beat the great depression."


                                    The conspirators were operating under the umbrella of a front group called the American Liberty League, which included many families that are still household names today, including Heinz, Colgate, Birds Eye and General Motors.

                                    Butler played along with the clique to determine who was involved but later blew the whistle and identified the ringleaders in testimony given to the House Committee on un-American Activities.

                                    However, the Committee refused to even question any of the individuals named by Butler and his testimony was omitted from the record, leading to charges that they were involved in covering the matter up, and the majority of the media blackballed the story.
                          • Re: You forgot this little part

                            Tue, July 24, 2007 - 5:24 PM
                            What is you point about the name. Who cares it is the fact that the CIA met with with bin Laden while he was there prior to 911 and could have taken him out. And provide a link to your source if you don't mind.
                            • Re: You forgot this little part

                              Tue, July 24, 2007 - 5:47 PM
                              <<What is you point about the name.

                              Because people kept saying that Bin Laden is being treated in an American Hospital, as if America was putting him up. In regards to the CIA meeting with him there, it has not been demonstrated as fact and is unsubstantiated.

                              Which source do you need a link to? The American Hospital of Dubai? www.ahdubai.com/main/profile.aspx
                            • Re: You forgot this little part

                              Tue, July 24, 2007 - 9:01 PM
                              <<What is you point about the name. Who cares it is the fact that the CIA met with with bin Laden while he was there prior to 911>>


                              I'm assuming you're referring to the much discredited French "intelligence report"? Another internet myth bouncing around...
                              • Re: You forgot this little part

                                Wed, July 25, 2007 - 4:54 AM
                                Brent who knocked the report down? Makes you wonder? Because to knock it down one would have to have some facts to back it up and where would those facts come from the CIA? Like they are going to set the record straight.......
                                • Re: You forgot this little part

                                  Wed, July 25, 2007 - 10:50 AM
                                  <<Because to knock it down one would have to have some facts to back it up

                                  Being that the initial report does not have any facts to back it up, you might want to apply the same standards to your belief that the reports are true. You are talking about an ALLEGATION, not a FACT.

                                  Here is the article that makes the claim....
                                  www.globalresearch.ca/article...11B.html

                                  1.) The account of the CIA agent visiting Bin Laden in this hospital is unsourced and from an unamed person.

                                  2.) It was unconfirmed, there was no independent confirmation.

                                  Another article claims confirmation, but we still don't know the source and thus can't confirm its accuracy.
                                  www.chinadaily.com.cn/en/doc/...1605.htm

                                  3.) Another question that is begging to be answered...... Would the CIAs main operative in Abhu Dabi brag about a secret meeting with Bin Laden to his friends? A secret meeting that you all are implying was part of the planning for Bush to perpetrate 9-11? Sounds very unlikely.

                                  4.) There is no proof that Bin Laden is on dialysis at all. Some even indicate that it is unlikely.
                                  washingtontimes.com/op-ed/20...2153r.htm

                                  5.) At the time of the alleged meeting, . bin Laden was being sought in a worldwide manhunt in connection with U.S. embassy bombings in East Africa in 1998. The United States was offering a $7 million reward for information leading to his capture. If Bin Laden was seeking treatment, you would have thought he would pick someplace with more stringent security.

                                  6.) Not one employee of this small hospital has reported treating Bin Laden, including the man who it is claimed actually treating him.

                                  There is a tendency among conspiracy theorists to beleive everything that comes out that supports their views regardless of if it is true or been substantiated. This is why we have people presenting as fact those things that are rumor, inuendo, conjecture, and assumption.
                                  • Re: You forgot this little part

                                    Thu, July 26, 2007 - 10:30 AM
                                    What, no response to this Enlilson?
                                    • Re: You forgot this little part

                                      Thu, July 26, 2007 - 2:41 PM
                                      Well Jeff I was in a class all day to deal with some issue in the emergency response world.

                                      So my reply is thus......... I was replying to you claim that old Prescott Bush was only in it for the money. Seems like overthrowing your own government is a bit beyond the pale of only wanting money and unless you have some research that deflys this I think you need to withdrawn your previous statements about what the Bush's were up too.
                                  • Re: You forgot this little part

                                    Thu, July 26, 2007 - 1:42 PM
                                    >>Being that the initial report does not have any facts to back it up, you might want to apply the same standards to your belief that the reports are true. You are talking about an ALLEGATION, not a FACT.

                                    And how many US claims about al Qaeda are presented as "allegations?" It is *alleged* that bin Laden was behind 9/11. It has not been proven, by any stretch of the imagination. Oh, they have a video... that was "found" by Special Forces in a house in Afghanistan. Was that story independently confirmed?

                                    >>1.) The account of the CIA agent visiting Bin Laden in this hospital is unsourced and from an unamed person.

                                    It's from French intelligence. The source, they claim, is "a partner of the administration of the American Hospital." Unnamed intelligence sources? Who'da thunk it.

                                    >>2.) It was unconfirmed, there was no independent confirmation.
                                    >>Another article claims confirmation, but we still don't know the source and thus can't confirm its accuracy.

                                    Anyone else see a contradiction? The "other article" references Richard Labeviere as the one making the claim. Mr. Labeviere is an expert who has done many studies of Islamic terrorism, and would also have similar confidential contacts. Another terrorism expert, Antoine Sfeir, also claims the story has been verified.

                                    Unnamed sources are common in any investigation on sensitive subjects. This doesn't mean that they should be simply taken at their word, but neither does it mean that they should be dismissed out of hand, especially when multiple sources are making the same claims through different channels.

                                    BTW, there has never been anything close to "independent confirmation" of the official account of 9/11.

                                    >>3.) Another question that is begging to be answered...... Would the CIAs main operative in Abhu Dabi brag about a secret meeting with Bin Laden to his friends? A secret meeting that you all are implying was part of the planning for Bush to perpetrate 9-11? Sounds very unlikely.

                                    Abu Dhabi? You mean Dubai? Maybe he did, maybe he didn't. On the one hand, some will claim that such conspiracies are impossible because someone would talk, yet when someone slips up and talks, you say it's unlikely. Unlikely, yes. Impossible, no. This point is generally superfluous to the story, as none of his "friends" are being cited as the source.

                                    >>4.) There is no proof that Bin Laden is on dialysis at all. Some even indicate that it is unlikely.

                                    Could those close to bin Laden denying his ailment be trying to make him appear stronger than he is? Reports of his ailments are pretty widespread.

                                    An interesting sidenote is that in the interview with the Pakistani journalist that is referenced in the linked editorial, wherein bin Laden denies kidney trouble, OBL gives no indication that he was behind 9/11:

                                    Hamid Mir: After American bombing on Afghanistan on Oct 7, you told the Al-Jazeera TV that the Sept 11 attacks had been carried out by some Muslims. How did you know they were Muslims?

                                    Osama bin Laden: The Americans themselves released a list of the suspects of the Sept 11 attacks, saying that the persons named were involved in the attacks. They were all Muslims, of whom 15 belonged to Saudi Arabia, two were from the UAE and one from Egypt. According to the information I have, they were all passengers. Fateha was held for them in their homes. But America said they were hijackers.
                                    www.dawn.com/2001/11/10/top1.htm

                                    >>5.) At the time of the alleged meeting, . bin Laden was being sought in a worldwide manhunt in connection with U.S. embassy bombings in East Africa in 1998. The United States was offering a $7 million reward for information leading to his capture. If Bin Laden was seeking treatment, you would have thought he would pick someplace with more stringent security.
                                    >>6.) Not one employee of this small hospital has reported treating Bin Laden, including the man who it is claimed actually treating him.

                                    According to terrorism expert Antoine Sfeir:
                                    "Before September 11, Dubai was the place where everyone met everyone: a neutral turf, quiet, a back alley without risk, a little like Portugal during World War II. Dubai is also the Switzerland of the Middle East: as long as you make money without disturbing the peace, you are not bothered."

                                    "When one has the financial means, anyone can have himself treated there with total discretion. For medical care, the doctors of the American hospital have a very good reputation."

                                    (The director of the "Eastern Journals," Antoine Sfeir has worked for 30 years on the Middle East and the Near East. He edited the Atlas of Religions and published several works, notably The Money of the Arabs (1992) and The Networks of Allah: The Islamic Affiliates in France and in Europe (2001).)
                                    www.globalresearch.ca/article...05A.html

                                    >>There is a tendency among conspiracy theorists to beleive everything that comes out that supports their views regardless of if it is true or been substantiated.

                                    The claim: 9/11 was solely the work of bin Laden and al Qaeda.

                                    Substantiate it.
                                    • Re: You forgot this little part

                                      Thu, July 26, 2007 - 2:03 PM
                                      <<It is *alleged* that bin Laden was behind 9/11. It has not been proven, by any stretch of the imagination.

                                      Except for his own confession.


                                      <<It's from French intelligence. The source, they claim, is "a partner of the administration of the American Hospital." Unnamed intelligence sources? Who'da thunk it.

                                      Exactly, "CLAIM". And there was a concerted effort by the French to undermine the Bush administrations case for war in Iraq, something I applaud them for. But there are also allegations that the French were putting out disinformation to undermine that case, some even say that they led the US in to the Yellow cake thing to undermine Bush's case. Of course, this is all conjecture and the claims are also unsourced and unsubstantiated. But if there are multiple possible answers then it can't be claimed that any one scenario is fact.

                                      <<Unnamed sources are common in any investigation on sensitive subjects. This doesn't mean that they should be simply taken at their word, but neither does it mean that they should be dismissed out of hand, especially when multiple sources are making the same claims through different channels.

                                      Just like Curveball and his buddies.... : ) Turned out that Curveball was full of shit.

                                      <<On the one hand, some will claim that such conspiracies are impossible because someone would talk, yet when someone slips up and talks, you say it's unlikely.

                                      Apples and oranges. When the conspiracy involves hundreds if not thousands of civilians, that is one thing. But for ONE CIA operative to go blabbing his mouth? Not very likely considering it is their job not to blab their mouths.
                                      • Re: You forgot this little part

                                        Thu, July 26, 2007 - 2:13 PM
                                        And he would ESPECIALLY not be likely to be blabbing if the meeting with Bin Laden was in regards to one of the largest conspiracies in the world, one that thousands of others (including civilians) have somehow managed to keep secret.
              • lead pipe cinch

                Tue, July 24, 2007 - 1:56 PM
                <<<s that really the best you could come up with? >>

                I was a little pressed for time. I'm sure you could improve upon it immeasurably>

                indubitably