• We have updated the guidelines regarding posting political content: please see the stickied thread on Website Issues.

BBC: Bush's Grandfather Planned Facist Coup in 1933

I

Iggore

Gone But Not Forgotten
(ACCOUNT RETIRED)
Joined
Aug 1, 2005
Messages
432
For once that I contribute a thread that doesnt aim to demonstrate the imminent islamization of Europe or the positive aspect of a nuclear war in the Near-east, I really do hope that this subject wasn't discussed at lenght before. So, after a lenghty research in this forum, here it is:

http://www.bbc.co.uk/radio4/history/doc ... 0723.shtml

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.
Click to expand...

Figures. But this is an amazing revelation. I'd like to see more documentation, but it would seem if the BBC decided to run with the story, then there is some grounding. This the same coup that Smedley Butler revealed, where you can find more info here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Business_Plot

The Business Plot, The Plot Against FDR, or The White House Putsch, was an uncovered conspiracy involving several wealthy businessmen to overthrow President Franklin D. Roosevelt in 1933.

Purported details of the matter came to light when retired Marine Corps Major General Smedley Butler testified before a Congressional committee that a group of men had attempted to recruit him to serve as the leader of a plot and to assume and wield power once the coup was successful. Butler testified before the McCormack-Dickstein Committee in 1934 [1]. In his testimony, Butler claimed that a group of several men had approached him as part of a plot to overthrow Roosevelt in a military coup. One of the alleged plotters, Gerald MacGuire, vehemently denied any such plot. In their final report, the Congressional committee supported Butler's allegations on the existence of the plot,[2] but no prosecutions or further investigations followed, and the matter was mostly forgotten.

General Butler claimed that the American Liberty League was the primary means of funding the plot. The main backers were the Du Pont family, as well as leaders of U.S. Steel, General Motors, Standard Oil, Chase National Bank, and Goodyear Tire and Rubber Company. A BBC documentary claims Prescott Bush, father and grandfather to the 41st and 43rd US Presidents respectively, was also involved.
Click to expand...

All in all, this means a few interesting things. Firstly, this mean that in 2004, both presidential candidates were connected to a fascist coup. Which is sweet. (John Kerry is connected to the owners of Heinz I believe).

Secondly, lets look at this poo poo again: a barely failed business coup in 1933 was successfully hushed up despite a congressional investigation thanks to the co-conspiring media. The backers of this attempted coup remain wealthy and affluent today, and their progeny run the country. How do we know a coup didn't actually taken place sometime down the road? Eisenhower warned of the growing power of our war industry, which includes a large number of the companies involved in 1933, and the president after him was assassinated under mysterious circumstances, and new evidence calls into question the single [crazy] gunman theory.

On the other hand, now, I'm no fancy big city lawyer, but a lot of people, including Churchill, thought the fascist way of dragging the country out of the depression was better than the alternative of socialism. Fascism was just a conservative counter to Communism, a way of addressing an entire class of people who thought they were being wronged. By 1933 the very first Concentration camp was being built, and was only used for Political prisoners. A 1933 Fascist coup attempt would be the same as a 1922 Communist coup attempt, the idea was fresh, it was appealing, and the horrors of the idealogy just hadn't come to light.

Also, Mr. Bush owned one share of a bank that was created by a man who helped bring the Nazis to power because he disliked communism, and that man as early as 1938 broke rank with the nazis and spent four years in a prison in Nazi Germany for disagreeing with their persecution of Catholics and Jews. Oh, and also, that bank was only associated with a group that was associated with the Nazis. And also they were never prosecuted. I hope I don't own any oil stocks or I might be aiding the terrorists?
 
On the other hand, now, I'm no fancy big city lawyer, but a lot of people, including Churchill, thought the fascist way of dragging the country out of the depression was better than the alternative of socialism. Fascism was just a conservative counter to Communism, a way of addressing an entire class of people who thought they were being wronged. By 1933 the very first Concentration camp was being built, and was only used for Political prisoners. A 1933 Fascist coup attempt would be the same as a 1922 Communist coup attempt, the idea was fresh, it was appealing, and the horrors of the idealogy just hadn't come to light.
Click to expand...

In the 1930s it seemed to a lot of people that liberal democracy was doomed. Otherwise decent people lined up with the fascists and communists because what they offered seemed modern and a vast improvement on the mass unemployment, weak government and social unrest which had become the reality in many Western countries.

We shouldn't excuse the 1930s apologists for Hitler and Stalin, but we probably shouldn't judge them by today's standards either.
 
Quake42 said:
...

In the 1930s it seemed to a lot of people that liberal democracy was doomed. Otherwise decent people lined up with the fascists and communists because what they offered seemed modern and a vast improvement on the mass unemployment, weak government and social unrest which had become the reality in many Western countries.

We shouldn't excuse the 1930s apologists for Hitler and Stalin, but we probably shouldn't judge them by today's standards either.
Click to expand...
And a lot of their contemporaries thought they were wrong then, too. If anything, "today's standards" may actually be rather weak, ambiguous and compromised, in comparison to those of the 1930s.
 
And a lot of their contemporaries thought they were wrong then, too.
Click to expand...

But fewer than you might think. Like it or not, many of those who shouted the loudest about their opponents' support for communism/fascism did so not because they wanted to defend democracy but rather because they wanted to promote their own totalitarian creed.

Otherwise decent trades unionists continued to support Soviet communism until well into the 50s, even though the horrors of Stalin's Russia were by then extremely clear.

George Orwell was a brave and all too rare voice against totalitarianism and "for democratic socialism", as he put it.
 
Quake42 said:
And a lot of their contemporaries thought they were wrong then, too.
Click to expand...

But fewer than you might think. Like it or not, many of those who shouted the loudest about their opponents' support for communism/fascism did so not because they wanted to defend democracy but rather because they wanted to promote their own totalitarian creed.

Otherwise decent trades unionists continued to support Soviet communism until well into the 50s, even though the horrors of Stalin's Russia were by then extremely clear.

George Orwell was a brave and all too rare voice against totalitarianism and "for democratic socialism", as he put it.
Click to expand...
Suffice it to say, opinions differ. This probably is one of those occasions where the benefit of hindsight comes into play. But, that hindsight will probably also telescope history to give a perspective which happens to coincide with whatever one's point of view was to begin with.

History plays tricks like that.
 
So,the grandson finished what the the grandfather started?That's how it appears to me.Why shouldn't I believe this?What with al quada being CIA 'off the shelf' assets still to this day.What proof have you that they are not?other than the word of those whom they either work for or directly benefit from their actions?I only wish there were a modern day Smedley Butler! we could use one.
 
The Bush family has a long history of attemting to hijack the system for their own personal gain, and the gain of the "elites." Their family fortune was started financing Hitler and the nazi's during this time period. Dubya has continued his family's legacy with focus and determination. He and his family are a disgrace to our nation.
 
Smedley

If you haven't read the fairly recent reissue of Smedley Butler's "War is a Racket," you really should try to get your hands on it. Butler was one of the guys in charge of setting up South America as colonies for US businesses, then he rebelled against his masters. He spoke in the voice of regular people, his riting is quite easy to follow, and he explains in great detail the scam being pulled on the entire human race.
 
A link to the above book, read it for free.

http://www.lexrex.com/enlightened/artic ... racket.htm

WAR is a racket. It always has been.

It is possibly the oldest, easily the most profitable, surely the most vicious. It is the only one international in scope. It is the only one in which the profits are reckoned in dollars and the losses in lives.

A racket is best described, I believe, as something that is not what it seems to the majority of the people. Only a small "inside" group knows what it is about. It is conducted for the benefit of the very few, at the expense of the very many. Out of war a few people make huge fortunes.

In the World War a mere handful garnered the profits of the conflict. At least 21,000 new millionaires and billionaires were made in the United States during the World War. That many admitted their huge blood gains in their income tax returns. How many other war millionaires falsified their tax returns no one knows.

How many of these war millionaires shouldered a rifle? How many of them dug a trench? How many of them knew what it meant to go hungry in a rat-infested dug-out? How many of them spent sleepless, frightened nights, ducking shells and shrapnel and machine gun bullets? How many of them parried a bayonet thrust of an enemy? How many of them were wounded or killed in battle?

Out of war nations acquire additional territory, if they are victorious. They just take it. This newly acquired territory promptly is exploited by the few – the selfsame few who wrung dollars out of blood in the war. The general public shoulders the bill.

And what is this bill?

This bill renders a horrible accounting. Newly placed gravestones. Mangled bodies. Shattered minds. Broken hearts and homes. Economic instability. Depression and all its attendant miseries. Back-breaking taxation for generations and generations.

For a great many years, as a soldier, I had a suspicion that war was a racket; not until I retired to civil life did I fully realize it. Now that I see the international war clouds gathering, as they are today, I must face it and speak out
Click to expand...
 
You can hear Butler's voice on the BBC radio post. What an amazing story. I had always heard of the Bonus Army and have a few friends, mostly ex GIs, that hate Gen. MacArther for firing upon them. My uncle Tommy was a sergeant on MacArther's staff and absolutely adored the man. Could it be that Mac's orders were appropriate after all?
 
This irritates me:

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.
Click to expand...

Hitler and Mussolini certainly were fascist but it doesn't follow that all their policies could be labelled as such. Someof their policies woud e quite unconnected with their ideologies. 'By 'the policies of' we instantly think of jews, ovens, and political repression etc. There was rather more to it than that. These people, rightly or wrongly, were admired by many for lifting nations from their knees. In that respect, they would be an acceptable model.
 
Smedley Butler is a fascinating figure, the type of old soldier it was hard to smear with charges of Communism, though he spoke at their meetings.

"War is a Racket" is well worth the time it takes to read and its lessons have not been lost on researchers looking into who has done very well from later and current conflicts. The major media have been less interested.

The main problem for Smedley Butler's reputation is that he was a powerful voice for US Isolationism at a time when the anti-fascist agenda had moved beyond cocktail putsch level. His strange career can be viewed in the hall of mirrors of paranoid politics, though it's hard to see who pulled his strings. A strange maverick, driven by war-trauma? Or a real loose cannon on the deck, rallying aggrieved old soldiers to a very dubious cause?

These old cases seemed dusty once upon a time but their perusal may shed some light on current affairs. Not that light ever stopped anything. :(
 
theyithian said:
This irritates me:

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.
Click to expand...

Hitler and Mussolini certainly were fascist but it doesn't follow that all their policies could be labelled as such. Someof their policies woud e quite unconnected with their ideologies. 'By 'the policies of' we instantly think of jews, ovens, and political repression etc. There was rather more to it than that. These people, rightly or wrongly, were admired by many for lifting nations from their knees. In that respect, they would be an acceptable model.
Click to expand...
Autobahns, book burnings, Volkswagens, re-armament, invading and subjugating one's neighbours, exterminating the Gypsies, Trades Unionists, Freemasons and Slavs, amongst others considered undesirable. Have I missed anything? :confused:
 
Pietro_Mercurios said:
theyithian said:
This irritates me:

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.
Click to expand...

Hitler and Mussolini certainly were fascist but it doesn't follow that all their policies could be labelled as such. Someof their policies woud e quite unconnected with their ideologies. 'By 'the policies of' we instantly think of jews, ovens, and political repression etc. There was rather more to it than that. These people, rightly or wrongly, were admired by many for lifting nations from their knees. In that respect, they would be an acceptable model.
Click to expand...
Autobahns, book burnings, Volkswagens, re-armament, invading and subjugating one's neighbours, exterminating the Gypsies, Trades Unionists, Freemasons and Slavs, amongst others considered undesirable. Have I missed anything? :confused:
Click to expand...

Yes, the fact that the two i have highlighted have very little to do with fascism or any ideology. They were just effective ideas.
 
theyithian said:
..

Autobahns, book burnings, Volkswagens, re-armament, invading and subjugating one's neighbours, exterminating the Gypsies, Trades Unionists, Freemasons and Slavs, amongst others considered undesirable. Have I missed anything? :confused:
Click to expand...

Yes, the fact that the two i have highlighted have very little to do with fascism or any ideology. They were just effective ideas.[/quote]
Well, the Volkswagen was something to aspire to and save for, although very few of them actually made it off the assembly line, for civilian use.

The autobahns were built mainly to enable Hitler's Futurist vision of motorized warfare, the Blitzkrieg. ;)
 
Pietro_Mercurios said:
The autobahns were built mainly to enable Hitler's Futurist vision of motorized warfare, the Blitzkrieg. ;)
Click to expand...
What! You mean that cunning old swine Hitler built autobahns in all the countries he planned to invade! :shock:

Damned clever, that! Even the Romans only built their famous roads after they'd invaded somewhere! 8)
 
rynner said:
Pietro_Mercurios said:
The autobahns were built mainly to enable Hitler's Futurist vision of motorized warfare, the Blitzkrieg. ;)
Click to expand...
What! You mean that cunning old swine Hitler built autobahns in all the countries he planned to invade! :shock:

Damned clever, that! Even the Romans only built their famous roads after they'd invaded somewhere! 8)
Click to expand...
No. He only built them as far as the German Borders. Before the War. That's why they were called autobahns and not snelwegen, or autoroutes.
http://www.britannica.com/ebc/article-209967

...

Transport also includes provision of fuel and the building of roads, bridges, and landing strips. One of the Roman Empire's more enduring contributions to Europe was the construction of good roads for its legions to march on. In the United States the Interstate Highway System was built with military movement in mind, as were the German autobahns of the 1930s.

...
Click to expand...
 
Pietro_Mercurios said:
..

The autobahns were built mainly to enable Hitler's Futurist vision of motorized warfare, the Blitzkrieg. ;)
Click to expand...

America's Interstate freeway system was funded as an improvement to national defense.

The History Of Oil videos were great.

ModEdit Warning: Slight edit for clarification purposes. P_M
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top