Conspiracy to fact

Torakx

I would be less concerned about wether people had a theory about it before the fact and more concerned about wether people on a large scale understand they are fact as appose to the history books and media's representations of those stories in some cases.
I think general popular opinion would be a good measure and that could be ascertained i suppose on a boards forum that wasnt a ct one but related to the Ct topic.
Easy to see what the rest of the country on average believe as most boards forums are populated by and large by "mainstream" folk if i can be forgiven for putting it that way.

Torakx

Di0genes wrote: »

Nazi Germany declared war on the United States three days after Pearl Habour, the United States did not declare war on Germany, Germany declared war on the USA.

Thats one of the many staggering and basically wrong "facts" in your theory.

Have you any more info on that?
I was under the impression the nazis had long range rockets in the 1940's or so.
I could be well off as its more an impression than a conviction but id be interested to learn more about what you just said if you have links or vids i can watch.

TalkieWalkie

Di0genes wrote: »

Nazi Germany declared war on the United States three days after Pearl Habour, the United States did not declare war on Germany, Germany declared war on the USA.

Thats one of the many staggering and basically wrong "facts" in your theory.

your opinion,i am sure there are many others. it's not my theory, just some info i researched. i stand by it.

edit : i did supply links to all the info

mysterious

Di0genes wrote: »

Nazi Germany declared war on the United States three days after Pearl Habour, the United States did not declare war on Germany, Germany declared war on the USA.

Thats one of the many staggering and basically wrong "facts" in your theory.

:rolleyes:
Obviously opinion not fact. The Illuminati declared war on Germany. Germany was getting to powerful for it's own good. They financed the war, and US/USA alliance invaded Germany and took control of it again. Don't you know the bushes financed Hitler? Mr. Prescott. It's just another way of trying to get you to realise the most powerful people decided whos in power, who is'nt, who dies and who stay's.

A lot of money and power is made from wars.

mcmoustache

mysterious wrote: »

:rolleyes:
The Illuminati declared war on Germany.

That's false. I'm not sure why you would want to spread such disinformation.

A declaration of war is a public statement. Have you got a copy of some document or a recording or even a fuzzy youtube link to show us how you came to believe that an entity called the Illuminati (who, by the way, couldn't organise a piss-up in a brewery) were able to declare war on a country?

TalkieWalkie

Di0genes wrote: »

Nazi Germany declared war on the United States three days after Pearl Habour, the United States did not declare war on Germany, Germany declared war on the USA.

Thats one of the many staggering and basically wrong "facts" in your theory.

mcmoustache wrote: »

That's false. I'm not sure why you would want to spread such disinformation.

A declaration of war is a public statement. Have you got a copy of some document or a recording or even a fuzzy youtube link to show us how you came to believe that an entity called the Illuminati (who, by the way, couldn't organise a piss-up in a brewery) were able to declare war on a country?

History repeats itself, this is common knowledge.

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
* The Guardian, Saturday 25 September 2004 23.59 BST
* Article history

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.

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. It has also been suggested that the money he made from these dealings helped to establish the Bush family fortune and set up its political dynasty.

Remarkably, little of Bush's dealings with Germany has received public scrutiny, partly because of the secret status of the documentation involving him. But now the multibillion dollar legal action for damages by two Holocaust survivors against the Bush family, and the imminent publication of three books on the subject are threatening to make Prescott Bush's business history an uncomfortable issue for his grandson, George W, as he seeks re-election.

While there is no suggestion that Prescott Bush was sympathetic to the Nazi cause, the documents reveal that the firm he worked for, Brown Brothers Harriman (BBH), acted as a US base for the German industrialist, Fritz Thyssen, who helped finance Hitler in the 1930s before falling out with him at the end of the decade. The Guardian has seen evidence that shows Bush was the director of the New York-based Union Banking Corporation (UBC) that represented Thyssen's US interests and he continued to work for the bank after America entered the war.

Tantalising

Bush was also on the board of at least one of the companies that formed part of a multinational network of front companies to allow Thyssen to move assets around the world.

Thyssen owned the largest steel and coal company in Germany and grew rich from Hitler's efforts to re-arm between the two world wars. One of the pillars in Thyssen's international corporate web, UBC, worked exclusively for, and was owned by, a Thyssen-controlled bank in the Netherlands. More tantalising are Bush's links to the Consolidated Silesian Steel Company (CSSC), based in mineral rich Silesia on the German-Polish border. During the war, the company made use of Nazi slave labour from the concentration camps, including Auschwitz. The ownership of CSSC changed hands several times in the 1930s, but documents from the US National Archive declassified last year link Bush to CSSC, although it is not clear if he and UBC were still involved in the company when Thyssen's American assets were seized in 1942.

Three sets of archives spell out Prescott Bush's involvement. All three are readily available, thanks to the efficient US archive system and a helpful and dedicated staff at both the Library of Congress in Washington and the National Archives at the University of Maryland.

The first set of files, the Harriman papers in the Library of Congress, show that Prescott Bush was a director and shareholder of a number of companies involved with Thyssen.

The second set of papers, which are in the National Archives, are contained in vesting order number 248 which records the seizure of the company assets. What these files show is that on October 20 1942 the alien property custodian seized the assets of the UBC, of which Prescott Bush was a director. Having gone through the books of the bank, further seizures were made against two affiliates, the Holland-American Trading Corporation and the Seamless Steel Equipment Corporation. By November, the Silesian-American Company, another of Prescott Bush's ventures, had also been seized.

The third set of documents, also at the National Archives, are contained in the files on IG Farben, who was prosecuted for war crimes.

A report issued by the Office of Alien Property Custodian in 1942 stated of the companies that "since 1939, these (steel and mining) properties have been in possession of and have been operated by the German government and have undoubtedly been of considerable assistance to that country's war effort".

Prescott Bush, a 6ft 4in charmer with a rich singing voice, was the founder of the Bush political dynasty and was once considered a potential presidential candidate himself. Like his son, George, and grandson, George W, he went to Yale where he was, again like his descendants, a member of the secretive and influential Skull and Bones student society. He was an artillery captain in the first world war and married Dorothy Walker, the daughter of George Herbert Walker, in 1921.

In 1924, his father-in-law, a well-known St Louis investment banker, helped set him up in business in New York with Averill Harriman, the wealthy son of railroad magnate E H Harriman in New York, who had gone into banking.

One of the first jobs Walker gave Bush was to manage UBC. Bush was a founding member of the bank and the incorporation documents, which list him as one of seven directors, show he owned one share in UBC worth $125.

The bank was set up by Harriman and Bush's father-in-law to provide a US bank for the Thyssens, Germany's most powerful industrial family.

August Thyssen, the founder of the dynasty had been a major contributor to Germany's first world war effort and in the 1920s, he and his sons Fritz and Heinrich established a network of overseas banks and companies so their assets and money could be whisked offshore if threatened again.

By the time Fritz Thyssen inherited the business empire in 1926, Germany's economic recovery was faltering. After hearing Adolf Hitler speak, Thyssen became mesmerised by the young firebrand. He joined the Nazi party in December 1931 and admits backing Hitler in his autobiography, I Paid Hitler, when the National Socialists were still a radical fringe party. He stepped in several times to bail out the struggling party: in 1928 Thyssen had bought the Barlow Palace on Briennerstrasse, in Munich, which Hitler converted into the Brown House, the headquarters of the Nazi party. The money came from another Thyssen overseas institution, the Bank voor Handel en Scheepvarrt in Rotterdam.

By the late 1930s, Brown Brothers Harriman, which claimed to be the world's largest private investment bank, and UBC had bought and shipped millions of dollars of gold, fuel, steel, coal and US treasury bonds to Germany, both feeding and financing Hitler's build-up to war.

Between 1931 and 1933 UBC bought more than $8m worth of gold, of which $3m was shipped abroad. According to documents seen by the Guardian, after UBC was set up it transferred $2m to BBH accounts and between 1924 and 1940 the assets of UBC hovered around $3m, dropping to $1m only on a few occasions.

In 1941, Thyssen fled Germany after falling out with Hitler but he was captured in France and detained for the remainder of the war.

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.

Erwin May, a treasury attache and officer for the department of investigation in the APC, was assigned to look into UBC's business. The first fact to emerge was that Roland Harriman, Prescott Bush and the other directors didn't actually own their shares in UBC but merely held them on behalf of Bank voor Handel. Strangely, no one seemed to know who owned the Rotterdam-based bank, including UBC's president.

May wrote in his report of August 16 1941: "Union Banking Corporation, incorporated August 4 1924, is wholly owned by the Bank voor Handel en Scheepvaart N.V of Rotterdam, the Netherlands. My investigation has produced no evidence as to the ownership of the Dutch bank. Mr Cornelis [sic] Lievense, president of UBC, claims no knowledge as to the ownership of the Bank voor Handel but believes it possible that Baron Heinrich Thyssen, brother of Fritz Thyssen, may own a substantial interest."

May cleared the bank of holding a golden nest egg for the Nazi leaders but went on to describe a network of companies spreading out from UBC across Europe, America and Canada, and how money from voor Handel travelled to these companies through UBC.

By September May had traced the origins of the non-American board members and found that Dutchman HJ Kouwenhoven - who met with Harriman in 1924 to set up UBC - had several other jobs: in addition to being the managing director of voor Handel he was also the director of the August Thyssen bank in Berlin and a director of Fritz Thyssen's Union Steel Works, the holding company that controlled Thyssen's steel and coal mine empire in Germany.

Within a few weeks, Homer Jones, the chief of the APC investigation and research division sent a memo to the executive committee of APC recommending the US government vest UBC and its assets. Jones named the directors of the bank in the memo, including Prescott Bush's name, and wrote: "Said stock is held by the above named individuals, however, solely as nominees for the Bank voor Handel, Rotterdam, Holland, which is owned by one or more of the Thyssen family, nationals of Germany and Hungary. The 4,000 shares hereinbefore set out are therefore beneficially owned and help for the interests of enemy nationals, and are vestible by the APC," according to the memo from the National Archives seen by the Guardian.

Red-handed

Jones recommended that the assets be liquidated for the benefit of the government, but instead UBC was maintained intact and eventually returned to the American shareholders after the war. Some claim that Bush sold his share in UBC after the war for $1.5m - a huge amount of money at the time - but there is no documentary evidence to support this claim. No further action was ever taken nor was the investigation continued, despite the fact UBC was caught red-handed operating a American shell company for the Thyssen family eight months after America had entered the war and that this was the bank that had partly financed Hitler's rise to power.

The most tantalising part of the story remains shrouded in mystery: the connection, if any, between Prescott Bush, Thyssen, Consolidated Silesian Steel Company (CSSC) and Auschwitz.

Thyssen's partner in United Steel Works, which had coal mines and steel plants across the region, was Friedrich Flick, another steel magnate who also owned part of IG Farben, the powerful German chemical company.

Flick's plants in Poland made heavy use of slave labour from the concentration camps in Poland. According to a New York Times article published in March 18 1934 Flick owned two-thirds of CSSC while "American interests" held the rest.

The US National Archive documents show that BBH's involvement with CSSC was more than simply holding the shares in the mid-1930s. Bush's friend and fellow "bonesman" Knight Woolley, another partner at BBH, wrote to Averill Harriman in January 1933 warning of problems with CSSC after the Poles started their drive to nationalise the plant. "The Consolidated Silesian Steel Company situation has become increasingly complicated, and I have accordingly brought in Sullivan and Cromwell, in order to be sure that our interests are protected," wrote Knight. "After studying the situation Foster Dulles is insisting that their man in Berlin get into the picture and obtain the information which the directors here should have. You will recall that Foster is a director and he is particularly anxious to be certain that there is no liability attaching to the American directors."

But the ownership of the CSSC between 1939 when the Germans invaded Poland and 1942 when the US government vested UBC and SAC is not clear.

"SAC held coal mines and definitely owned CSSC between 1934 and 1935, but when SAC was vested there was no trace of CSSC. All concrete evidence of its ownership disappears after 1935 and there are only a few traces in 1938 and 1939," says Eva Schweitzer, the journalist and author whose book, America and the Holocaust, is published next month.

Silesia was quickly made part of the German Reich after the invasion, but while Polish factories were seized by the Nazis, those belonging to the still neutral Americans (and some other nationals) were treated more carefully as Hitler was still hoping to persuade the US to at least sit out the war as a neutral country. Schweitzer says American interests were dealt with on a case-by-case basis. The Nazis bought some out, but not others.

The two Holocaust survivors suing the US government and the Bush family for a total of $40bn in compensation claim both materially benefited from Auschwitz slave labour during the second world war.

Kurt Julius Goldstein, 87, and Peter Gingold, 85, began a class action in America in 2001, but the case was thrown out by Judge Rosemary Collier on the grounds that the government cannot be held liable under the principle of "state sovereignty".

Jan Lissmann, one of the lawyers for the survivors, said: "President Bush withdrew President Bill Clinton's signature from the treaty [that founded the court] not only to protect Americans, but also to protect himself and his family."

Lissmann argues that genocide-related cases are covered by international law, which does hold governments accountable for their actions. He claims the ruling was invalid as no hearing took place.

In their claims, Mr Goldstein and Mr Gingold, honorary chairman of the League of Anti-fascists, suggest the Americans were aware of what was happening at Auschwitz and should have bombed the camp.

The lawyers also filed a motion in The Hague asking for an opinion on whether state sovereignty is a valid reason for refusing to hear their case. A ruling is expected within a month.

The petition to The Hague states: "From April 1944 on, the American Air Force could have destroyed the camp with air raids, as well as the railway bridges and railway lines from Hungary to Auschwitz. The murder of about 400,000 Hungarian Holocaust victims could have been prevented."

The case is built around a January 22 1944 executive order signed by President Franklin Roosevelt calling on the government to take all measures to rescue the European Jews. The lawyers claim the order was ignored because of pressure brought by a group of big American companies, including BBH, where Prescott Bush was a director.

Lissmann said: "If we have a positive ruling from the court it will cause [president] Bush huge problems and make him personally liable to pay compensation."

The US government and the Bush family deny all the claims against them.

In addition to Eva Schweitzer's book, two other books are about to be published that raise the subject of Prescott Bush's business history. The author of the second book, to be published next year, John Loftus, is a former US attorney who prosecuted Nazi war criminals in the 70s. Now living in St Petersburg, Florida and earning his living as a security commentator for Fox News and ABC radio, Loftus is working on a novel which uses some of the material he has uncovered on Bush. Loftus stressed that what Prescott Bush was involved in was just what many other American and British businessmen were doing at the time.

"You can't blame Bush for what his grandfather did any more than you can blame Jack Kennedy for what his father did - bought Nazi stocks - but what is important is the cover-up, how it could have gone on so successfully for half a century, and does that have implications for us today?" he said.

"This was the mechanism by which Hitler was funded to come to power, this was the mechanism by which the Third Reich's defence industry was re-armed, this was the mechanism by which Nazi profits were repatriated back to the American owners, this was the mechanism by which investigations into the financial laundering of the Third Reich were blunted," said Loftus, who is vice-chairman of the Holocaust Museum in St Petersburg.

"The Union Banking Corporation was a holding company for the Nazis, for Fritz Thyssen," said Loftus. "At various times, the Bush family has tried to spin it, saying they were owned by a Dutch bank and it wasn't until the Nazis took over Holland that they realised that now the Nazis controlled the apparent company and that is why the Bush supporters claim when the war was over they got their money back. Both the American treasury investigations and the intelligence investigations in Europe completely bely that, it's absolute horse****. They always knew who the ultimate beneficiaries were."

"There is no one left alive who could be prosecuted but they did get away with it," said Loftus. "As a former federal prosecutor, I would make a case for Prescott Bush, his father-in-law (George Walker) and Averill Harriman [to be prosecuted] for giving aid and comfort to the enemy. They remained on the boards of these companies knowing that they were of financial benefit to the nation of Germany."

Loftus said Prescott Bush must have been aware of what was happening in Germany at the time. "My take on him was that he was a not terribly successful in-law who did what Herbert Walker told him to. Walker and Harriman were the two evil geniuses, they didn't care about the Nazis any more than they cared about their investments with the Bolsheviks."

What is also at issue is how much money Bush made from his involvement. His supporters suggest that he had one token share. Loftus disputes this, citing sources in "the banking and intelligence communities" and suggesting that the Bush family, through George Herbert Walker and Prescott, got $1.5m out of the involvement. There is, however, no paper trail to this sum.

The third person going into print on the subject is John Buchanan, 54, a Miami-based magazine journalist who started examining the files while working on a screenplay. Last year, Buchanan published his findings in the venerable but small-circulation New Hampshire Gazette under the headline "Documents in National Archives Prove George Bush's Grandfather Traded With the Nazis - Even After Pearl Harbor". He expands on this in his book to be published next month - Fixing America: Breaking the Stranglehold of Corporate Rule, Big Media and the Religious Right.

In the article, Buchanan, who has worked mainly in the trade and music press with a spell as a muckraking reporter in Miami, claimed that "the essential facts have appeared on the internet and in relatively obscure books but were dismissed by the media and Bush family as undocumented diatribes".

Buchanan suffers from hypermania, a form of manic depression, and when he found himself rebuffed in his initial efforts to interest the media, he responded with a series of threats against the journalists and media outlets that had spurned him. The threats, contained in e-mails, suggested that he would expose the journalists as "traitors to the truth".

Unsurprisingly, he soon had difficulty getting his calls returned. Most seriously, he faced aggravated stalking charges in Miami, in connection with a man with whom he had fallen out over the best way to publicise his findings. The charges were dropped last month.

Biography

Buchanan said he regretted his behaviour had damaged his credibility but his main aim was to secure publicity for the story. Both Loftus and Schweitzer say Buchanan has come up with previously undisclosed documentation.

The Bush family have largely responded with no comment to any reference to Prescott Bush. Brown Brothers Harriman also declined to comment.

The Bush family recently approved a flattering biography of Prescott Bush entitled Duty, Honour, Country by Mickey Herskowitz. The publishers, Rutledge Hill Press, promised the book would "deal honestly with Prescott Bush's alleged business relationships with Nazi industrialists and other accusations".

In fact, the allegations are dealt with in less than two pages. The book refers to the Herald-Tribune story by saying that "a person of less established ethics would have panicked ... Bush and his partners at Brown Brothers Harriman informed the government regulators that the account, opened in the late 1930s, was 'an unpaid courtesy for a client' ... Prescott Bush acted quickly and openly on behalf of the firm, served well by a reputation that had never been compromised. He made available all records and all documents. Viewed six decades later in the era of serial corporate scandals and shattered careers, he received what can be viewed as the ultimate clean bill."

The Prescott Bush story has been condemned by both conservatives and some liberals as having nothing to do with the current president. It has also been suggested that Prescott Bush had little to do with Averill Harriman and that the two men opposed each other politically.

However, documents from the Harriman papers include a flattering wartime profile of Harriman in the New York Journal American and next to it in the files is a letter to the financial editor of that paper from Prescott Bush congratulating the paper for running the profile. He added that Harriman's "performance and his whole attitude has been a source of inspiration and pride to his partners and his friends".

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."

However, one of the country's oldest Jewish publications, the Jewish Advocate, has aired the controversy in detail.

More than 60 years after Prescott Bush came briefly under scrutiny at the time of a faraway war, his grandson is facing a different kind of scrutiny but one underpinned by the same perception that, for some people, war can be a profitable business.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2004/sep/http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2004/sep/25/usa.secondworldwar25/usa.secondworldwar

Brown Bomber

Di0genes wrote: »

Nazi Germany declared war on the United States three days after Pearl Habour, the United States did not declare war on Germany, Germany declared war on the USA.

Thats one of the many staggering and basically wrong "facts" in your theory.

Not as simple as that is it?

Germany were bound by the Tripartite Pact which said:

ARTICLE 3. Japan, Germany, and Italy agree to cooperate in their efforts on aforesaid lines. They further undertake to assist one another with all political, economic and military means if one of the Contracting Powers is attacked by a Power at present not involved in the European War or in the Japanese-Chinese conflict.

Di0genes

Brown Bomber wrote: »

Not as simple as that is it?

Germany were bound by the Tripartite Pact which said:

Should I list the amount of treaties and declarations the Nazis broke or went into without the intention of honouring.

Germany declared war on the US. Preening on about "facts" verses reality shows that while you're fine on semantics, actually reality has a troubling way of intruding on your claims.

Honestly I blame post modernism for this nonsense.

Brown Bomber

Di0genes wrote: »

Should I list the amount of treaties and declarations the Nazis broke or went into without the intention of honouring.

No, because it is not comparable. Unless you think it is realistic to break an alliance with a major wartime ally in the middle of a World War

Di0genes wrote: »

Germany declared war on the US. Preening on about "facts" verses reality shows that while you're fine on semantics, actually reality has a troubling way of intruding on your claims.

Here is the reality.

Then Adolf Hitler made his announcement at the Reichstag in Berlin saying he had tried to avoid direct conflict with the US but, under the Tripartite Agreement signed on 27 September 1940, Germany was obliged to join with Italy to defend its ally Japan.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/onthisday/hi/dates/stories/december/11/newsid_3532000/3532401.stm

Di0genes wrote: »

Honestly I blame post modernism for this nonsense.

Anyway, there is no need to get so excited. Your bold claims weren't as clear-cut as you'd like to pretend - No big deal.

Torakx

Di0genes wrote: »

Should I list the amount of treaties and declarations the Nazis broke or went into without the intention of honouring.

Germany declared war on the US. Preening on about "facts" verses reality shows that while you're fine on semantics, actually reality has a troubling way of intruding on your claims.

Honestly I blame post modernism for this nonsense.

Im confused now.Are they facts posted by talkiewalkie and brownbomber just recently there or are they lies?
I dont understand what you mean about facts versus reality.Surely they both go hand in hand if your looking for the real truth of any situation.
I dont mind if Germany did declare war on the USA and that they might have also had dealings with them,but i would like to see some info or facts as we are calling it to show that was the case or likely.
If we are just going to defend our belief without being open to updating it or refining it then we on the path to ignorance i feel.
In fairness i havent read talkiewalkies massive post yet but would appreciate so evidence for both sides of the dicussion.

TalkieWalkie

Torakx wrote: »

Im confused now.Are they facts posted by talkiewalkie and brownbomber just recently there or are they lies?
I dont understand what you mean about facts versus reality.Surely they both go hand in hand if your looking for the real truth of any situation.
I dont mind if Germany did declare war on the USA and that they might have also had dealings with them,but i would like to see some info or facts as we are calling it to show that was the case or likely.
If we are just going to defend our belief without being open to updating it or refining it then we on the path to ignorance i feel.
In fairness i havent read talkiewalkies massive post yet but would appreciate so evidence for both sides of the dicussion.

I have provided facts, diogenes is probably referring to something he learned at school, in which case he could scan a copy of hist history book, but that would be pointless as we know those books are full of bull.
I have also provided links to the points I raised for those who are really interested in knowing the true story.
All the wars the united states have been involved were false flag and or started under false pretenses and in many cases they funded the opposition. Of course this is open to argument, this is the whole point of the thread with my goal being to show that nothing you are told by big government eventually turns out to be true and nothing happens in government for the reason you think it does, there are no mistakes and we are the victims. But I also would like to see some evidence from anyone who wishes to dispute any of my findings. Otherwise, butt out:rolleyes:

PirateShampoo

Brown Bomber wrote: »

No, because it is not comparable. Unless you think it is realistic to break an alliance with a major wartime ally in the middle of a World War

You mean the same way Germany did to Russia?

Di0genes

TalkieWalkie wrote: »

I have provided facts, diogenes is probably referring to something he learned at school, in which case he could scan a copy of hist history book, but that would be pointless as we know those books are full of bull.

Ah so your facts are really real, while everyone elses facts are nonsense.

Germany declared war on the united states on Dec 11 1941. America declared war on Germany in response. This isn't open to discussion.

All the wars the united states have been involved were false flag and or started under false pretenses and in many cases they funded the opposition. Of course this is open to argument, this is the whole point of the thread with my goal being to show that nothing you are told by big government eventually turns out to be true and nothing happens in government for the reason you think it does, there are no mistakes and we are the victims. But I also would like to see some evidence from anyone who wishes to dispute any of my findings. Otherwise, butt out:rolleyes:

Ah so basically you're dismissing everyone elses points, while at the same time dismissing their sources, and claiming you're open to having your mind changed. Convenient that.

Di0genes

PirateShampoo wrote: »

You mean the same way Germany did to Russia?

What PS said. Exactly how was Japan a major Ally that Germany could not afford to lose? What logistical or Practical support did the the Japanese offer to the Nazis?

TalkieWalkie

Di0genes wrote: »

Ah so your facts are really real, while everyone elses facts are nonsense.

No


Ah so basically you're dismissing everyone elses points, while at the same time dismissing their sources, and claiming you're open to having your mind changed. Convenient that.

No. As of yet, no-one else has provided a source. Try adding a link to information.

America may have publicly declared war on Germany on Dec 11 1941 but they were actively involved in it long before and (if you read you would know) funded Hitlers rise to power.
Don't be so naive in thinking they didn't want to go to war, it was planned years prior.
It is quite foolish, naive and silly just to argue for the sake of arguing. If you actually care about it, look into, don't be wasting my time.

Remember, the winners of wars write history, so it will be pretty easy to find information disputing the facts I put forward. Try look for the truth, look past your school books and wiki.

Edit :

1941: Germany and Italy declare war on US
Germany and Italy have announced they are at war with the United States. America immediately responded by declaring war on the two Axis powers.

Three days ago, US President Franklin Roosevelt announced America was at war with Japan, the third Axis power, following the surprise attack on its naval base at Pearl Harbor.

Today Italian dictator, Benito Mussolini, made his declaration first - from the balcony over the Piazza Venezia in Rome - pledging the "powers of the pact of steel" were determined to win.

Then Adolf Hitler made his announcement at the Reichstag in Berlin saying he had tried to avoid direct conflict with the US but, under the Tripartite Agreement signed on 27 September 1940, Germany was obliged to join with Italy to defend its ally Japan.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/onthisday/hi/dates/stories/december/11/newsid_3532000/3532401.stm
We also now know that the U.S knew about the pending attack from Japan on pearl harbor but let it happen so as to get involved in the war, it would also give them a perfect opportunity to test their new bomb too.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pearl_Harbor_advance-knowledge_debate

Brown Bomber

Torakx wrote: »

Im confused now.

That is what happens when someone gives you a half-truth and claims it as the truth.

Torakx wrote: »

Are they facts posted by talkiewalkie and brownbomber just recently there or are they lies?

Everything I posted is the truth. What Diogenes posted was a half-truth either to purposely obfuscate or he genuinely didn't know but the truth is quite simple.

Germany DID declare war on the US, BUT they only did so because they were tied into a defensive pact with Italy and Japan whereby should any of the states be attacked it would be considered an attack on all.

Ironically the pact was formulated with the sole intention to act as a deterrent to US involvement in war.

Therefore the CT of Pearl Harbour being allowed or encouraged to happen to get the US into the war is still plausable.

If they secretly åermitted the Pearl Harbour attack it was done with the abolute surety that the US would declare war on Japan which in turn would result in Italy and Germany being automatically at war with the US.

Brown Bomber

Di0genes wrote: »

What PS said. Exactly how was Japan a major Ally that Germany could not afford to lose? What logistical or Practical support did the the Japanese offer to the Nazis?

They tied up Allied forces in the Pacific, and the Far East. Potential two-front attack on the US and Russia. Made it more difficult for the Allied forces to concentrate in Europe, easier for the Germans. There are so many obvious reasons to have an extra strong friend than an enemy in a multi-front war.

TalkieWalkie

mysterious wrote: »

It's like the saying "keep sticking your head in the sand if you don't want to see the world for what it is"

The NWO is a fact. Oh dear god.:D Are you actually for real on this? Shudders.

I would say it's more the case of, one being born with one's in the sand or placed in the sand soon after birth. And when people shout down to them, "take your head out of the sand, there is a better view from up here!!", they reply, "no I'm quite comfortable here thanks, whats a "view" anyway ? actually, I don't wanna know"

Torakx

Funnily enough i have it first hand from many people i know that they would rather keep their heads in the sand.I think the term one likes to use is " ignorance is bliss".On an individual scale i think they are right.If i died moderatly happy believing i was a sovereign person then i might leave this world feeling i had accomplished my lifes goal which i would imagine on average is to just live a happy life.
Compared to the thoughts of suffering the truth of my reality, living a life as a slave knowing the plights of others to a much larger extent.

I always choose the second option.Most choose the first and i totally understand why they do so.I dont agree its healthy but i understand when a creature is put under severe pressure it needs an escape from that reality.
This has already been provided by the media and most will find it easier to accept that happier reality than the awfull truths that they fear deep in the psyche.
It reminds me of the movie "The matrix"
Remember the guy who wanted to rejoin the matrix because it was better than the reality of his situation?
Also consider the defence mecanisms of the mind when put under severe trauma.It reverts to a memory,ussually from child hood putting the person into a childlike state ussually living in that reality like a matrix until its safe to come out again.

Putting this into perspective now i think the mind will build its reality as we go through life.By the time we make it to this forum we have already created our matrix.We know where everything is because we personally put it there.When someone messes with our matrix our minds instinct is to push it away because the subconscious has a conflict with its reality.

Thats why we have so many arguements on these forums.We cant be expected to change our matrix in one go.Each change needs to be gradual and blended if the mind is not going to go into react mode.
This has nothing to do with what is actually true or not, only why we bury our heads in the sand.
Of course i never bury my head in the sand(sarcasm),because id know if i was doing it right?
The problem with the subconscious is that most of the time we are not actually conscious of it at all.
I do advise checking facts and circumstantial evidence even if it sounds crazy or too mainstream.Unless you wish your matrix to match the majority or minority which is also a fair choice individually.I just think it can create a sort of rabbit whole when you enter the CT world in a two fold sense.
The stereo typical skeptic enjoys breaking mirrors(in the alice in wonderland type mirror reality situation) while the stereo typical CT'er cant help but look/fall down the rabbit hole.
Those are extremes and stereo typical but it explains well enough i think how i feel about what i see happening.

I think i at first fell down the rabbit hole.I like to see it now that i can enter and travel as far as i like, but only go so far so i dont get too lost in there.
Reality i think is neither one side of the mirror or the other.It is the mirror.
Since we all share the same material reality that is projected into us and filtered individually lets try work together and get the actual facts right.
I would love to see a chart on this forum with a list of conspiracy theories that finally made it to both sides of the mirror(agreeable to everyone).
Leaving us with the rest to work together on.At least as a small community we will have together accomplished something educational for newcomers, created a frame of reference for research and learning while hopefully creating an atmosphere where we can share thoughts without fear of prejudice.
I suppose this isnt the forum for such a system as i couldnt even edit a first post every few months to update the chart.Just thought it would be great for topics like this.
A person seeking to not fall down the rabbit hole but also keep up to date with reality might find a suitable anchor in that chart.

humanji

You guys want to knock off the swipes at half the users here?

Mahatma coat

as far as deal renegin goes goes in WW2 it was the JApanese who left hitler in the lurch, War was declared on America as a sign of Solidarity with Japan in the hopes that Japan would attack Russia, howeer most comentators at the time would have been aware of their disasterous engagements with Russia inthe early thirties campaigns into china and Manchuria.

it was yet another example of Hitler not listening to his advisors and hoping that his theory was right, much like the evenin he took a blue crayon and devised the miltipronged unmitigated failure that was 'Barbarosa'

Di0genes

TalkieWalkie wrote: »

No. As of yet, no-one else has provided a source. Try adding a link to information.

America may have publicly declared war on Germany on Dec 11 1941 but they were actively involved in it long before and (if you read you would know) funded Hitlers rise to power.

No they weren't

Don't be so naive in thinking they didn't want to go to war, it was planned
http://news.bbc.co.uk/onthisday/hi/dates/stories/december/11/newsid_3532000/3532401.stm
We also now know that the U.S knew about the pending attack from Japan on pearl harbor but let it happen so as to get involved in the war, it would also give them a perfect opportunity to test their new bomb too.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pearl_Harbor_advance-knowledge_debate

The US knew war with Japan was inevitable, they just didn't expect the audacious strike at Pearl Habor but rather in the Phillipines, which the Japanese attacked on the 8th of December.

This is is the conspiracy theorist problem fixating on one singular event, and presuming one single motivation, by one side, as the only possible reason for something to happen.

TalkieWalkie

whatever diogenes, im not bothering with you. you have no argument.

Antrim Hotels

The world needs to get back on track otherwise there will be no future and people will be out of homes and jobs etc

Di0genes

TalkieWalkie wrote: »

whatever diogenes, im not bothering with you. you have no argument.

You claim that the among other things the Pearl Habour attack was a false flag attack. When it's been pointed out to you the pearl habour attack was an isolated incident you ignore it, you then, you claim that any source that disagrees with your claims is biased and part of the conspiracy, and yet you quote the BBC website. And now you get petulant and strop off.

Wow you're breaking the mold of reality here.

TalkieWalkie

Di0genes wrote: »

No they weren't




The US knew war with Japan was inevitable, they just didn't expect the audacious strike at Pearl Habor but rather in the Phillipines, which the Japanese attacked on the 8th of December.

This is is the conspiracy theorist problem fixating on one singular event, and presuming one single motivation, by one side, as the only possible reason for something to happen.

They didn't expect it ? How come the local newspaper knew about it ?
Hilo Hawaii tribune November 30 1941

http://www.google.ie/images?hl=en&q=hilo%20hawaii%20tribune%20november%2030%201941&um=1&ie=UTF-8&source=og&sa=N&tab=wi
Did the local newspaper have better intelligence thn the president ?? No, the president knew about it also. How much proof you need ? LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL The truth always come to the surface, but can you handle it ? Nope LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL

uncleoswald

TalkieWalkie wrote: »

They didn't expect it ? How come the local newspaper knew about it ?

Did the local newspaper have better intelligence thn the president ?? No, the president knew about it also. How much proof you need ? LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL The truth always come to the surface, but can you handle it ? Nope LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL

Fail:
http://www.hawaiitribune-herald.com/articles/2009/12/07/local_news/local01.prt

Unfortunately, Epperson's Pearl Harbor theory falls apart when you read the article:

"WASHINGTON, Nov. 29 (UP) -- Cancellation of leaves in Singapore tonight coincided with a widespread belief that Japan will strike somewhere over the weekend. Unofficial sources said Tokyo was apparently desperate because she feels the Cordell Hull-Saburo Kurusu talks are near collapse and may strike in an effort to 'break encirclement.'"

Yes, the article referred to a possible Japanese invasion -- of Singapore, Britain's biggest military base in Southeast Asia and an Allied stronghold. Japan did attack, and when Singapore fell 15 months later, it was the largest surrender of British-led soldiers in history.

What the article did not refer to was an attack on Hawaii -- not even close.

And the moral of the story is: Research everything, because you can be damned sure the conspiracy sites don't.

humanji

I think the truth of that is somewhere in the middle. The US knew Japan was going to attack, but didn't know where. It was widely believed that the Philipines would be the target so the commander in Hawaii felt there was no reason to worry (I think he was later court martialed).

There had been some info that Pearl Harbour would be attacked, but since there were so many possible targets, it wasn't seen as being particularly likely. I read somewhere that the guy who James Bond was based on was the one who gave that info to the US. It said that because he was such a womaniser and seemed unsavoury to the US officials that they assumed he couldn't be trusted.

TalkieWalkie

uncleoswald wrote: »

Fail:
http://www.hawaiitribune-herald.com/articles/2009/12/07/local_news/local01.prt



And the moral of the story is: Research everything, because you can be damned sure the conspiracy sites don't.

Any idea why they wouldn't show the actual article ? I have a good idea, it's because they predicted America was the target.

Pixel8

I must say, its a waste of time trying to get through to Di0genes, i've tried in the past but he's just so negative towards anything controversial or unorthodox that im not sure why he even bothers reading this stuff at all, wouldn't you prefer to do something with your life that is more positive and actually makes you happy instead of arguing on the CT forum every day of your life for the past few years? I can only come to the conclusion that he must be getting paid to write his drivel.

If you honestly believe that America did nothing to provoke the Japanese into retaliation than you haven't got a clue. Everything that happens in politics and war is PLANNED! America wanted to join the war coz the loans taken out for the war by America were all owed to the international bankers who financed them so the backers of america stood to make billions of of the war. Almost every american president was corrupt except Thomas Jefferson, Andrew Jackson, Abraham Lincoln and JFK. The rest of them have all been controlled throughout history by the international bankers, and how do bankers make most money? By financing both sides of every war so no matter who wins, the bankers win. Or through intentional contracting of the money supply to cause recessions and mass buy up of land at cheap prices, foreclosures etc. This is pure and utter fact, and if you can't see the stranglehold that the bankers have on all governments around the world, then you have NOT done enough research...

If there is 1 documentary you should watch that will make all of this make sense, its The Secret Of Oz, amazing documentary which really opens your eyes to the lies our history books have perpetuated for the last few hundred years at least.

The Bombing of Pearl Harbor

On 7 December 1941 the greatest disaster in United States history occurred. Truly this was and is, “’A date which will live in infamy.’”(Costello 1), but not for the bombing of Pearl Harbor, rather for the deception and the mis-guidance used by the Government and Franklin D. Roosevelt. In a purely artificial chess game Roosevelt sacrificed over 2400 American Seamen’s lives, thanks to his power as Commander in Chief of the Armed Forces. By over-looking the obvious facts of an attack by Japan on Pearl Harbor, Roosevelt was able to control both the political and economic systems of the United States. Most of American society before the Pearl Harbor bombing believed in the idea of isolationism.

Franklin D. Roosevelt knew this, and knew the only way in which United States countrymen would take arms and fight in Europe’s War was to be an overt action against the United States by a member of the Axis Power. Roosevelt also believed Hitler would not declare war on the United States unless he knew they were beatable. There are numerous accounts of actions by Roosevelt and his top armed forces advisors, which reveal they were not only aware of an attack by Japan, but also they were planning on it, and instigating that attack. On 7 October 1940, Lieutenant Commander Arthur H. McCollum, head of the Far East desk of the Office of Naval Intelligence, wrote the eight-action memo.

This memo outlined eight different steps the United States could do that he predicted would lead to an attack by Japan on the United States. The day after this memo was giving to Franklin D. Roosevelt, he began to implement these steps. By the time that Japan finally attacked the United States at Pearl Harbor on 7 December 1941, all eight steps had occurred (Willy 1). The eight steps consisted of two main subject areas; the first being a sign of United States military preparedness and threat of attack, the second being a forceful control on Japans trade and economy. The main subject area of the eight-action memo was the sign of United States military preparedness and threat of attack. McCollum called for the United States to make arrangements with both Britain (Action A) and Holland (Action , for the use of military facilities and acquisition of supplies in both Singapore and Indonesia.

He also suggested for the deployment of a division of long-range heavy cruisers (Action D) and two divisions of submarines (Action E) to the Orient. The last key factor McCollum called for was to keep the United States Fleet in the vicinity of the Hawaiian Islands (Action F). Roosevelt personally took charge of Action’s D and E; these actions were called “pop up” cruises. Roosevelt had this to say about the cruises, “’I just want them to keep popping up here and there and keep the Japs guessing (Stinnett 9).’” With the fleet located around Hawaii and particularly in Pearl Harbor a double-sided sword was created; it allowed for quicker deployment times into South Pacific Water, but more importantly it lacked many fundamental military needs, and was vulnerable due to its geographic location. To understand the true vulnerability of Pearl Harbor one must look at Oahu, the Hawaiian Island that the military base is located. The North part of the island is all mountains, these mountains hinder the vision of military look out points, making an attack from the North virtually a surprise until the sound of fighter planes are over head.

There were many key military needs that were missing from Pearl Harbor, and they were; a lack of training facilities, lack of large-scale ammunition and fuel supplies, lack of support craft such as tugs and repair ships, and a lack of overhaul facilities such as dry-docking and machine shops. Commander in Chief, United States Fleet - Admiral James O. Richardson, was outraged when he was told by President Roosevelt of his plans on keeping the fleet in Hawaiian Waters. Richardson knew of the problems and vulnerability of Pearl Harbor, the safety of his men and warships was paramount. In a luncheon with Roosevelt, Richardson confronted the President, and by doing so ended his military career. Four months later Richardson was removed as commander-in-chief, and replaced by Rear Admiral Husband Kimmel (Stinnett 11).

Kimmel by many top Naval personal was looked down upon on, for taking orders from Roosevelt and not considering the immediate dangers he was putting the fleet in. The second part of McCollum’s eight-action memo was a forceful control on Japans trade and economy. He insisted that the Dutch refuse to grant Japanese demands for oil (Action G), and a complete embargo of all trade with Japan (Action H), by the United States. This embargo closely represented a similar embargo that was being imposed by the British Empire. McCollum also knew that if Japan controlled the Pacific, it would put a strain on America’s resources for copper, rubber, tin, and other valuable goods. These imports from the Pacific were all essential to America’s Economy, and to protect these trading routes McCollum insisted for all possible aid to be given to the Chinese government of Chiang Kai-shek (Action C).

Japan had some control over China due to a military operation, which took over part of the country. Thanks to the control, Japan took and used many raw goods from China that were not in abundance in their own homeland. The government of Chiang Kai-shek was completely against Japan, and with economic support from the United States, they were able to deny certain possessions from Japan. The United States Government and United States Navy by withholding important information about the bombing of Pearl Harbor have done everything they can do to protect the integrity of President Franklin D. Roosevelt and the government. True nationalist believe this information is withheld from the general public in order to protect national security, and not to hide a conspiracy that was created by the United States Government some fifty years ago.

This school of thought asks people and wants them to think, “How in the world could the President of the United States sacrifice over 2400 American seamen’s life’s, horrific amounts of damages to the Fleet, and tremendous amounts of destruction to Army fighter planes?” This group also asks, “In the past fifty years why has there not be one single piece of hard evidence which links Roosevelt to Pearl Harbor, or why has there not been one person who had top security clearance to come out and say something about Roosevelt and his involvement with the bombing?”

On 5 December 1941 at a Cabinet meeting, Secretary of the Navy Frank Knox said, “Well, you know Mr. President, we know where the Japanese fleet is?” “Yes, I know, …Well, you tell them what it is Frank,” said Roosevelt (Toland 294). Knox became extremely excited with the ok from Roosevelt, and he went to tell the group of where the Japanese were and where they were headed. Just as Knox was about to speak Roosevelt interrupted saying, “ We haven’t got anything like perfect information as to their apparent destination (Toland 294).” All Navy reports showed the Japanese were in Pacific Water, and were in a direction towards Hawaii and Pearl Harbor. Roosevelt knew this information, but one must wonder why in the world would he not want to tell his cabinet this information, unless he wanted to hide something? On 6 December 1941 at a White House dinner Roosevelt was given the first thirteen parts of a fifteen part decoded Japanese diplomatic declaration of war and said, “This means War (Toland 318).”

Later that night, Roosevelt along with top advisor Harry Hopkins, Henry Stimson, George Marshall, Secretary of the Navy Knox, with aides John McCrea and Frank Beatty deliberately sat through the night waiting for the Japanese to strike Pear Harbor (Toland 320). Not until the morning of 7 December 1941 at 7:55 Hawaii Time did Japan deliberately and forcefully attack the United States at Pearl Harbor, finally ending disillusioned isolationist ideas of an only European War. United States countrymen immediately ran to recruiting offices after the news of the attack, to join the armed forces and fight against the Japanese and Hitler.

Beyond a doubt Pearl Harbor was President Franklin D. Roosevelt’s back door into the European War. Roosevelt’s decisions and actions were very much so, deliberate and calculated, in order to lead a victorious Allied Powers in World War II. By provoking the Japanese and the foreknowledge of an attack on Pearl Harbor, Roosevelt along with his top advisors and the Federal Government are truly to blame for the lost of American life’s and American property. 7 December 1941 shall be a day in American history, which will be remembered as “a day of deceit.”

Works Cited

Costello, John. Days of Infamy. New York: Pocket Books, 1994. Stinnett, Robert B. Day of Deceit. New York: The Free Press, 2000. Toland, John. Infamy. New York: Doubleday & Company, Inc, 1982. Willey, Mark. “Pearl Harbor Mother of all Conspiracies.” 13 Mar. 2001. www.geocities.com/Pentagon/6315/pearl.html. Works Consulted Larrabee, Eric. Commander in Chief. New York: Harper & Row, 1987. Prange, Gordon W. December 7, 1941 The Day the Japanese Attacked Pearl Harbor. New York: McGraw-Hill Book Company, 1988. The Roosevelt Years to United States Enters World War II. Videocassette. By Arthur M. Schlesinger, Jr. Flimic Achieves, 1995. 75 mins. Thompson, Robert S. A Time For War. New York: Prentice Hall Press, 1991.
http://tinyurl.com/5whg3e

Why did Roosevelt want to enter into World War II? Was it to defeat the tyranny of Hitler? Stalin, who was our partner during the war, was even more vicious and tyrannical than Hitler. Was it to stop the aggression of the Japanese? Before the war, this country did everything it could to give Japan no choice and goad them into waging war.
Roosevelt was a 33rd degree mason. That is the highest level one can attain in the satanic Masonic order. One of objectives of the lucifer worshipping Masonic order is to establish a one world government. After World War I these people tried, and failed, to start a one world government organization, The League of Nations. Realizing they would need another world war to finally create such an organization, they manipulated world events, started and won World War II, and created the United Nations, the tool for the final phase of one world government.

http://www.apfn.org/apfn/pearl_harbor.htm