http://www.bartcop.com/421102.htm
Hier las ik het volgende stukje:
Prescott Bush received $750,000 for his share of Union Banking Corporation, a princely sum in 1951, but nothing compared to the millions the Thyssen family got back. Prescott used some of this Nazi cash to bankroll his son George Herbert Walker Bush’s first business enterprise and to support his successful bid for Senate in 1952.
Vroeg me af of dit bekent is bij de meeste mensen.
Prescott Bush - Hitler's Angel
The Nazi's banker in America
Hitler’s Angel
Many of the great houses of American industry and finance had very dirty hands when it came to dealing with the Nazis. General Motors, IBM, Standard Oil and many others have had their sorted dealings with the enemies of the United States aired in public forums. However, one criminal has had little exposure – Prescott Bush, father and grandfather to two occupants of the Whitehouse.
The story of Prescott Bush and his association with the Nazis begins just before the end of World War I with the dealings of the German industrialist family of Thyssen. As German hopes for victory sank into the mud filled trenches of the western front, August Thyssen, known as the “Rockefeller of the Rhur” opened the Bank voor Handel en Scheepvaart in Rotterdam, placing his son Fritz at its head. The bank, being in neutral Holland, was an excellent place to hide his vast wealth as the Imperial Germany disintegrated. Meanwhile, his other son, Heinrich, married into Hungarian nobility and changed his name to Barron Thyssen Bornemisza de Kaszon.
After the war, Avrell Harriman, son of the rail baron E. H. Harriman, and his partner George Herbert Walker, was busy setting up their own international banking network. In 1922, Harriman met with Fritz Thyssen and agreed to set up banking interests for him in the states. By 1924, the Union Banking Corporation was born.
Meanwhile, back in Germany, the crippling effects of the war and the harsh conditions inflicted on the German economy due to the Versailles Treaty were causing widespread unrest. One of the players in this unrest was, of course, Adolph Hitler. Fritz Thyssen became an ardent follower of Hitler, embarrassing the ideas of the Nazis, especially his anti-union, anti-labor views. He provided Hitler with his first infusion of cash. Several German industrialists followed Thyssen’s lead and also donated to the Nazis. After the failed “Beer Hall Putsch” in 1923, many gave up on Hitler, but not Thyssen.
The late 1920’s saw a boom in the German economy. August Thyssen died, leaving his son Fritz in control of their vast holdings. Thyssen merged his steel operations with Flick who owned many coal and steel interests throughout Germany and Poland, forming United Steel Works (USW). Walker and Harriman meanwhile sold $50,000,000 in German bonds to bankroll the Thyssen/Flick Empire.
It was at this time that the young Prescott Bush entered the picture. Walker hired his new son-in-law to run the American side USW. Prescott was a hard worker and helped everyone involved make a great deal of money.
Then 1929 came. World financial markets crumbled to dust. However, the plutocrats –, Thyssen, Harriman and Flick maintained their empires. With the ever-deepening desperation setting into the mindset of the German public, Hitler’s maniacal rants became more popular. Thyssen joined the Nazis and bankrolled their rise to power. By 1932, despite loosing 35 seats in parliament in the national election, the Nazis were able to broker a power sharing deal. By 1934 Hitler was the dictator of Germany.
Hitler wanted to see the rebirth of Germany. He began a massive campaign to build the autobahn and rebuild his military. All of this needed steel, steel which Thyssen and Flick controlled. Profits for the Bank voor Handel en Scheepvaart and the Union Banking Corporation soared. Prescott Bush became managing director of Union Banking Corporation and personally ran the German end of the business.
However, all was not rosy for the gang. The Polish government was growing weary of Flick’s operations in Poland and threatening to take over the businesses claiming fraudulent bookkeeping, securities fraud, tax evasion and excessive borrowing. The conflict with the Polish government ended when Hitler invaded, destroying that nation and, starting World War II in Europe.
Thyssen and Flick’s Polish steel interests were centered at Oswiecim in the heart of a vast coal and steel-producing region. After Hitler’s takeover, he decided to place a forced labor camp in the area in order to exploit the resource rich state. That camp became Auschwitz.
Thyssen and Flick, fearing a repeat of the collapse of Germany after WWI, bailed out, selling their Polish interests to Union Banking Corporation and fleeing Germany. As it turned out, Fritz and his brother Heinrich had made similar slights of hand between these banks and a third bank – The August Thyssen Bank of Berlin – many times, perpetrating a series of tax and securities frauds. Whenever there was a threat to the Thyssen Empire, the brothers would collude to hide their assets. In this case, Harriman became the controlling interest and Bush managed the former Polish enterprises, all of which were supplied labor from the camps at Auschwitz.
On December 13, 1941, six days after the attack at Pearl Harbor, Roosevelt signed the “Trading With the Enemy Act”. This act banned business dealings the enemies of the United States. Prescott Bush ignored this and continued to do business with the Nazis.
Prescott’s dreams of riches began to crumble in the summer of 1942. The New York Tribune had discovered and written on the Bush-Thyssen connection. The Tribune hung the moniker of “Hitler’s Angel” on Bush. On October 20, 1942, after investigation by the US government, Vesting Order 248 was executed. The order stated…
Under the authority of the Trading with the enemy Act, as amended, and pursuant to law, the undersigned, after investigation, finding:
(a) That the property described as follows:
All of the capital stock of Union Banking Corporation, a New York corporation, New York, New York, …[identifying E. Roland Harriman, Cornelius Lievense, Harold D. Pennington, Ray Morris, Prescott S. Bush, H.J. Kouwenhoven and Johann G. Groeninger as shareholders] …
… all of which shares are held the benefit of Bank voor Handel en Scheepvaart, N.V., Rotterdam, The Netherlands, which bank is owned or controlled by members of the Thyssen family, nationals of German and/or Hungary …
(b) That the property described as follows …is an interest in the aforesaid business enterprise held by nationals of an enemy country or countries, and also is property within the United States owned or controlled by nationals of a designated enemy country… deemed it necessary in the national interest, hereby vests such property in the Alien Property Custodian, to be held, used, administered, liquidated, sold or otherwise dealt with in the interest of and for the benefit of the United States….
With that, Prescott Bush lost his power in the Union Banking Corporation. Bush resigned as managing director in 1943, but still retained his stock interests. For the remainder of the war, he engaged in fund raising activities and became the founder of the United Services Organizations (USO).
But the story, and the audacity, of Prescott Bush do not end here. For that, we must return to Fritz Thyssen.
After Holland was overrun in 1940, Hitler’s auditors investigated the Bank voor Handel en Scheepvaart. Hitler was after Fritz Thyssen’s fortune, which had been transferred to the Netherlands after he fled Germany in 1939. Transfer of funds outside the Reich was illegal. However, no evidence was found in Rotterdam and Hitler imprisoned his one-time benefactor for the duration of the war. Unknown to Hitler, Thyssen had transferred his family’s assets to his brother Heinrich in Hungary.
As the war ground on and German hopes faded, Thyssen planned to transfer his empire back to “neutral” Rotterdam as in German and the Soviet bloc would not be recoverable. The only hitch in the plan was that the August Thyssen Bank of Berlin was destroyed in the war and the vault with all the Thyssen family papers were buried under a mountain of rubble. But the enterprising Thyssen brothers got Dutch authorities to dig up the vault and bring it back to The Netherlands.
Despite being held and interrogated by the Allies, Fritz Thyssen never told the authorities where his fortune was hidden and ultimately he was released from prison. He died in Argentina in 1951. Upon his death, the Alien Property Custodian released the assets of the Union Banking Corporation. The principles cashed out and the UBC was no more.
Prescott Bush received $750,000 for his share of Union Banking Corporation, a princely sum in 1951, but nothing compared to the millions the Thyssen family got back. Prescott used some of this Nazi cash to bankroll his son George Herbert Walker Bush’s first business enterprise and to support his successful bid for Senate in 1952. The Thyssen’s rebuilt their empire, and today, the Thyssen Group (TBG) is the largest industrial conglomerate in Germany.
quote:TRU?Op donderdag 9 maart 2006 14:35 schreef Tup het volgende:
Het zou mooi zijn als een goede discussie wordt opgestart, eerdere topics op dit vlak eindigden echter in TRU.
Verder is het ook boeiend te kijken naar wat voor soort mensen bush nu het ontwikkelingsgeld geeft, kom je ook bij zieke instituten uit
quote:Ongelofelijk wat een bedrag...Prescott Bush received $750,000 for his share of Union Banking Corporation, a princely sum in 1951
quote:Wat begrijp je niet precies aan 1951 en inflatie in het algemeen?
quote:Dan interesseert het me nog geen biet. Half Nederland heeft zaken gedaan met de Nazi's; zullen we hun kleinkinderen en achterkleinkinderen daar ook lastig mee blijven vallen?Op donderdag 9 maart 2006 14:48 schreef Frank-NL het volgende:
[..]
Wat begrijp je niet precies aan 1951 en inflatie in het algemeen?
quote:Nou... Ik vind het bijvoorbeeld ongeloofelijk raar dat deze mensen er NIET mee lastig gevallen worden en dat geld gewoon mogen gebruiken om hun zaakjes van destijds nu in deze tijd nog eens voort te zetten.Op donderdag 9 maart 2006 14:50 schreef klez het volgende:
Dan interesseert het me nog geen biet. Half Nederland heeft zaken gedaan met de Nazi's; zullen we hun kleinkinderen en achterkleinkinderen daar ook lastig mee blijven vallen?
Kijk. Die Prescott Bush heeft met dat geld onder andere een heleboel oliebronnen gefinancierd in Koeweit. En de eerste Bush stond daarom natuurlijk flink te springen om er voor te zorgen dat Koeweit de hulp van de VS in zou roepen. Want daarmee kon hij zijn eigen oliebronnen redden. Saddam Hoessein viel Koeweit aan vanwege die oliebronnen, daar was Hoessein duidelijk in. Maar Saddam Hoessein had ook ooit de kans gekregen om in Irak aan de macht te komen DOOR de VS.
De VS was echter achteraf niet zo blij met Saddam Hoessein en zijn hem afgevallen. Saddam, op zijn beurt, vond dat ook niet leuk.
Nou ga ik speculeren... Saddam is een wraakzuchtig mannetje, en hij was boos op de VS. Hoe kun je beter wraak op de VS nemen dan de persoonlijke oliebronnen van de president van de VS te stelen? Dan raak je hem in zijn portemonnaie, de zwakste plek van een kapitalist.
En zo schildert zich het beeld af van een persoonlijke vete tussen George S. Bush en Saddam Hussein.
Nou is George W. Bush een heel ander soort persoon dan zijn pa. Gezien zijn manier van doen, gaat het hem voornamelijk om populariteit. Wat W. Bush's motieven zijn, weet ik niet, maar ik denk dat hij echt gelooft dat hij wat goeds doet voor de wereld. Niet omdat hij zich schaamt voor zijn voorouders, maar vanwege eerzucht.
Ik denk dus dat dat gedoe rond die olievelden in Koeweit van de familie Bush amper speelt bij de huidige Bush.
quote:Wat een gelul. Het begint er al mee dat Saddam niet door de VS aan de macht is geholpen.Op donderdag 9 maart 2006 15:38 schreef RetepV het volgende:
[..]
Nou... Ik vind het bijvoorbeeld ongeloofelijk raar dat deze mensen er NIET mee lastig gevallen worden en dat geld gewoon mogen gebruiken om hun zaakjes van destijds nu in deze tijd nog eens voort te zetten.
Kijk. Die Prescott Bush heeft met dat geld onder andere een heleboel oliebronnen gefinancierd in Koeweit. En de eerste Bush stond daarom natuurlijk flink te springen om er voor te zorgen dat Koeweit de hulp van de VS in zou roepen. Want daarmee kon hij zijn eigen oliebronnen redden. Saddam Hoessein viel Koeweit aan vanwege die oliebronnen, daar was Hoessein duidelijk in. Maar Saddam Hoessein had ook ooit de kans gekregen om in Irak aan de macht te komen DOOR de VS.
De VS was echter achteraf niet zo blij met Saddam Hoessein en zijn hem afgevallen. Saddam, op zijn beurt, vond dat ook niet leuk.
Nou ga ik speculeren... Saddam is een wraakzuchtig mannetje, en hij was boos op de VS. Hoe kun je beter wraak op de VS nemen dan de persoonlijke oliebronnen van de president van de VS te stelen? Dan raak je hem in zijn portemonnaie, de zwakste plek van een kapitalist.
En zo schildert zich het beeld af van een persoonlijke vete tussen George S. Bush en Saddam Hussein.
Nou is George W. Bush een heel ander soort persoon dan zijn pa. Gezien zijn manier van doen, gaat het hem voornamelijk om populariteit. Wat W. Bush's motieven zijn, weet ik niet, maar ik denk dat hij echt gelooft dat hij wat goeds doet voor de wereld. Niet omdat hij zich schaamt voor zijn voorouders, maar vanwege eerzucht.
Ik denk dus dat dat gedoe rond die olievelden in Koeweit van de familie Bush amper speelt bij de huidige Bush.
Saddam heeft zich in Irak naar de top gemoord in de jaren '70, een periode waarin de VS geen contacten in Irak hadden en de Soviet Unie de belangrijkste externe machtsfactor was in Irak.
quote:Onzin. Saddam was in die tijd de grote tegenpool tegen het communisme in Irak en werd wel degelijk door de VS flink ondersteunt:Op donderdag 9 maart 2006 15:50 schreef klez het volgende:
[..]
Wat een gelul. Het begint er al mee dat Saddam niet door de VS aan de macht is geholpen.
Saddam heeft zich in Irak naar de top gemoord in de jaren '70, een periode waarin de VS geen contacten in Irak hadden en de Soviet Unie de belangrijkste externe machtsfactor was in Irak.
quote:In 1976, Saddam rose to the position of general in the Iraqi armed forces. He rapidly became the strongman of the government. The US government, through CIA agents, assisted Saddam with taking over the day to day operations of running Iraq. At the time Saddam was considered an enemy of communism and radical islamism, and at one point Donald Rumsfeld, special envoy of President Ronald Reagan at the time, met with him. Saddam was integral to US policy in the region which tried to weaken the influence of Iran and the Soviet Union. As Iraq's weak and elderly President Ahmed Hassan al-Bakr became increasingly unable to execute the duties of his office, Saddam began to take an increasingly prominent role as the face of the Iraqi government, both internally and externally. He soon became the architect of Iraq's foreign policy and represented the nation in all diplomatic situations. He was the de facto ruler of Iraq some years before he formally came to power in 1979. He slowly began to consolidate his power over Iraq's government and the Ba'ath party. Relationships with fellow party members were carefully cultivated, and Saddam soon gained a powerful circle of support within the party.
quote:Klopt niks van. Daanspeak ofzo zekerOp donderdag 9 maart 2006 16:06 schreef Vhiper het volgende:
[..]
Onzin. Saddam was in die tijd de grote tegenpool tegen het communisme in Irak en werd wel degelijk door de VS flink ondersteunt:
[..]
Jeb Sharp: US policymakers put their strategic goals for the Persian Gulf down on paper decades ago: ensuring access to oil, defending Israel and preventing any one power from dominating the region. After War World Two, America's energy demands began to outstrip its supply. It turned to the Middle East to quench its thirst. The security of the Gulf became a priority. In the 1950s as the Cold War set in, Washington cultivated allies there to stave off the Soviets. One of those allies was Iraq. But not for long. In 1958 a revolution overthrew the pro-Western monarchy. Baghdad turned toward Moscow. US distaste for Iraq only deepened through the 1960s and 70's. It wasn't just that Iraq's new leaders leaned toward the Soviets. Iraq was also aggressively anti-Israel. Washington put it in the category of radical Arab states that deserved pariah status. Meanwhile US officials made friends with other countries in the Gulf, notably Saudi Arabia and Iran. These two became the so-called "twin pillars" of US support in the region. Then came the Iranian revolution.
Ken Pollack: In 1979 when the Islamic revolution sweeps Iran there is a tremendous fear that the Islamic revolution is going to catch fire throughout the Middle East.
[ Bericht 28% gewijzigd door klez op 09-03-2006 16:22:27 ]
quote:The Truth is in Here...Op donderdag 9 maart 2006 14:35 schreef Tup het volgende:
Het zou mooi zijn als een goede discussie wordt opgestart, eerdere topics op dit vlak eindigden echter in TRU.
quote:Waarom TRU?Op donderdag 9 maart 2006 20:47 schreef Sidekick het volgende:
Ja, het lijkt mij ook eerder een TRU-topic. *schop*
How Bush's grandfather helped Hitler's rise to power (The Guardian)
“Bush - Nazi Dealings Continued Until 1951” - Federal Documents (The New Hampshire Gazette)
Translation Of Newsweek Article On Bush Nazi Ties (Scoop)
Documents: Bush's Grandfather Directed Bank Tied to Man Who Funded Hitler (Fox News)
etc.
Het is geen conspiracy ofzo. Prescott is zelfs in oktober 1942, schuldig bevonden onder de "Trading With the Enemy Act". Is niks TRU aan.
Maar 80% van de Americanen weten het niet (meer)
was trouwens THYSEN companie uit rotterdam ! bernhard weet ervan !
quote:Saddam kwam dan ook met Amerikaanse hulp aan de macht in 1979, zoals mijn bron al vermelde en kegelde dat regime van de jaren 60 en 70 eruitOp donderdag 9 maart 2006 16:11 schreef klez het volgende:
[..]
Klopt niks van. Daanspeak ofzo zeker
Jeb Sharp: US policymakers put their strategic goals for the Persian Gulf down on paper decades ago: ensuring access to oil, defending Israel and preventing any one power from dominating the region. After War World Two, America's energy demands began to outstrip its supply. It turned to the Middle East to quench its thirst. The security of the Gulf became a priority. In the 1950s as the Cold War set in, Washington cultivated allies there to stave off the Soviets. One of those allies was Iraq. But not for long. In 1958 a revolution overthrew the pro-Western monarchy. Baghdad turned toward Moscow. US distaste for Iraq only deepened through the 1960s and 70's. It wasn't just that Iraq's new leaders leaned toward the Soviets. Iraq was also aggressively anti-Israel. Washington put it in the category of radical Arab states that deserved pariah status. Meanwhile US officials made friends with other countries in the Gulf, notably Saudi Arabia and Iran. These two became the so-called "twin pillars" of US support in the region. Then came the Iranian revolution.
Ken Pollack: In 1979 when the Islamic revolution sweeps Iran there is a tremendous fear that the Islamic revolution is going to catch fire throughout the Middle East.
quote:En zoals mijn bron met link vermeldde is dat niet het geval. Mag ik jou bron nog even zien om de geloofwaardigheid te checken?Op vrijdag 10 maart 2006 06:12 schreef Vhiper het volgende:
[..]
Saddam kwam dan ook met Amerikaanse hulp aan de macht in 1979, zoals mijn bron al vermelde en kegelde dat regime van de jaren 60 en 70 eruit
Er zijn zo een stuk of duizend bronnen te vinden die kunnen bevestigen dat de VS pas na 1979 enige interesse in Irak toonden. Gedurende de jaren '70 heeft men Irak en Saddam volledig links laten liggen. Saddam heeft zelf de macht gegrepen en heeft de Baath partij niet afgezet maar gewoon gebruikt door mensen tegen elkaar uit te spelen en tegenstanders te liquideren.
[ Bericht 1% gewijzigd door klez op 10-03-2006 10:35:17 ]
quote:http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/p(...)erviews/aburish.htmlHowever, the communists are hardly thrown out and not long after, they turn to Saddam, and he personally leads a delegation to Moscow, and there's a development of a relationship between the two. What game was he playing?
Well, alliances of convenience don't last very long. The Ba'ath Party was committed to certain things which American foreign policy could not tolerate. In this particular case it lasted a very short time, really a matter of two weeks. And Saddam got rid of all of the pro-American elements in the government and he asserted his authority on the country. He was not the president. He was the second man, after a relation of his from Tikrit, President Ahmed Bakr. But what happened immediately after that is the things they needed, they couldn't get from the United States anymore. They needed help economically. They needed arms. And the United States were not in the business of openly supplying arms to Arab countries to re-equip themselves for another round of fighting. That was the major issue between the two sides. Saddam knew he could get the arms from Russia and he journeyed to Russia -- this was his first trip outside Iraq, outside of exile of course -- and he got what he wanted. And the alliance of convenience disintegrated as they always do.
So, there was a new alliance, this time with the Soviets.
In 1972, Iraq and the Soviet Union signed a treaty of friendship and cooperation. They wanted to seal the cooperation taking place between them in a formal alliance. The reason Saddam signed that treaty of friendship and cooperation was because that obligated the local communist party, which was very strong, to cooperate with the Ba'ath Party, which was not so strong at that time.
Of course the Russians loved an opportunity to have a hold on Iraq and they signed the treaty and told the local communist party to join the Iraqi government. That alliance internally did not last very long. But the external one was on and off for a very long time. And the Soviet Union at one point thought Iraq was a more important ally than Egypt. Its army always acquitted itself better than the Egyptian army. It was a wealthy country that didn't need a lot of aid, like Egypt. And it was the gateway to the Gulf, to oil. It represented a more immediate threat to the West's lifeline than Egypt did.
quote:Er zijn zo een stuk of duizend bronnen te vinden die je tegenspreken, ik noem maar even deze, uit een interview met iemand die Saddam van dichtbij heeft meegemaakt in die tijden:Op vrijdag 10 maart 2006 10:29 schreef klez het volgende:
[..]
En zoals mijn bron met link vermeldde is dat niet het geval. Mag ik jou bron nog even zien om de geloofwaardigheid te checken?
Er zijn zo een stuk of duizend bronnen te vinden die kunnen bevestigen dat de VS pas na 1979 enige interesse in Irak toonden. Gedurende de jaren '70 heeft men Irak en Saddam volledig links laten liggen. Saddam heeft zelf de macht gegrepen en heeft de Baath partij niet afgezet maar gewoon gebruikt door mensen tegen elkaar uit te spelen en tegenstanders te liquideren.
quote:http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/p(...)erviews/aburish.htmlWhile he was in Cairo, there's some belief that he may have had contact with Americans, with the CIA. What can you tell us about that?
There is very good reason to believe that Saddam Hussein was in contact with the American embassy in Cairo when he was in exile. This is not strange, because alliances of convenience were taking place every day, and the United States was afraid that Iraq, under Kassem, might be going communist. So was the Ba'ath Party. So they had a common enemy, a common target -- the possibility of a communist take-over of Iraq.
So there is a record of Saddam visiting the American embassy frequently, and there is a record of the Egyptian security people telling him not to do that. However, one must remember that at that time, Saddam was a minor official of the Ba'ath Party. He was not terribly important. And he was really following in the footsteps of other people who are much more important.
And what would be the idea behind all this?
The visits to the American embassy by Saddam Hussein and other members of the Ba'ath Party had one purpose, and one purpose only: to cooperate with the Americans towards the overthrow of General Kassem in Iraq. Kassem was slightly pro-communist and the Americans wanted to get rid of that danger. Allen Dulles described Iraq as the most dangerous part of the earth in front of a congressional committee. The Ba'ath thought Kassem was their enemy, so there was a mutuality there. And whether a conspiracy transpired or not, the evidence is actually in favor of it having taken place. But the conspiracy was for the duration of getting rid of Kassem. It was not an alliance of permanent nature.
There was a coup in Iraq in 1963. What do we know about the U.S. involvement in that coup?
The U.S. involvement in the coup against Kassem in Iraq in 1963 was substantial. There is evidence that CIA agents were in touch with army officers who were involved in the coup. There is evidence that an electronic command center was set up in Kuwait to guide the forces who were fighting Kassem. There is evidence that they supplied the conspirators with lists of people who had to be eliminated immediately in order to ensure success. The relationship between the Americans and the Ba'ath Party at that moment in time was very close indeed. And that continued for some time after the coup. And there was an exchange of information between the two sides. For example it was one of the first times that the United States was able to get certain models of Mig fighters and certain tanks made in the Soviet Union. That was the bribe. That was what the Ba'ath had to offer the United States in return for their help in eliminating Kassem.
Do we know to what extent Saddam Hussein was involved in the killings when he came back from Cairo?
I have documented over 700 people who were eliminated, mostly on an individual basis, after the 1963 coup. And they were eliminated based on lists supplied by the CIA to the Ba'ath Party. So the CIA and the Ba'ath were in the business of eliminating communists and leftists who were dangerous to the Ba'ath's takeover.
The coup took place in April, Saddam Hussein did not return to Iraq until May. But he went to work immediately. He became an interrogator in the Fellaheen and Muthaqafeen detention camps. They are camps where they kept communists and fellow travellers, after they took power. And in interrogating people in those camps, he used torture, and undoubtedly like everybody else involved in this activity, eliminated people. In 1963 he was still one of the party's toughs, one of the party's thugs, if you wish.
Jumping forward a few years to 1967 and the Arab-Israeli conflict, we've heard that the Soviets then looked to Baghdad in terms of gaining influence in the Middle East. And the Ba'ath Party also wants to get back into power. Describe in the run-up to the 1968 coup, the Cold War dynamics of what was going on in the Middle East, and in particular Iraq, and how the Ba'ath Party was able to use those dynamics to help them get back into power.
In 1968, Iraq had a weak president who was beholden to Nasser, a follower of Nasser. But the defeat of [the Arabs by Israel] in 1967 meant that whatever government was in power when that defeat took place had to go. So the Ba'ath saw an opportunity in this and they thought the time has come for them to take over the country again. The background was extremely interesting. There were two things happening within Iraq at that time. They were developing their own oil and very close to giving the concessions for huge new oil fields, to the USSR and France. And the price of sulpher had shot up so greatly that they were about to mine the sulpher mines in the north and sell it in the world market.
The United States didn't want either to happen. The United States wanted the oil for American oil companies; they wanted the sulpher for themselves. They thought that if Iraq went to the Soviet Union or France, Iraq would be lost to them. In this they were joined by the Ba'ath Party. The Party used the concessions for oil and sulpher as a bargaining point to endear itself once again to America. And they arrived once again at some kind of an agreement of collaboration between the two sides. On the American side negotiating for both the oil and sulpher was a well-known personality, Robert Anderson, the former secretary of treasury under Eisenhower. He met secretly with the Ba'ath and they agreed that if they took over power these concessions will be given to the United States.
And so once again the United States was in the business of supporting the Ba'ath office for the government of Iraq. The Ba'ath was successful. This time Saddam Hussein played a key role. He was one of the people who donned a military uniform -- though he's not a military man -- and attacked the presidential palace and occupied it. The president, being weak, surrendered immediately. Two weeks after they took over power on the 17th of July 1968, there was what they call "the correction movement." That meant getting rid of the non-Ba'ath elements in the coup, and Saddam was prominent in that. As a matter of fact he held a gun to the head of the prime minister and said, "You're going with me to the airport because you're leaving this country." And the guy pleaded with him, said, "I have family, I have a wife and kids." And Saddam said, "Well as long as you behave, they'll be fine." He took him to the airport, he put him in a plane, he deported him, and of course years after, he assassinated him in front of the Intercontinental Hotel in London. The man couldn't escape him in the long run.
quote:Hier staat toch echt niet dat de Amerikanen Saddam in de jaren '70, voorafgaand aan zijn machtsgreep in '79, hebben geholpen. Integendeel.Op vrijdag 10 maart 2006 13:57 schreef Vhiper het volgende:
[..]
Er zijn zo een stuk of duizend bronnen te vinden die je tegenspreken, ik noem maar even deze, uit een interview met iemand die Saddam van dichtbij heeft meegemaakt in die tijden:
[..]
http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/p(...)erviews/aburish.html
Maar die hele discussie ging helemaal niet over Saddam en Bush, maar over de Bush/Nazi gelden.
quote:Nee. Onder historici is juist algemeen bekend dat de VS in de jaren '70, de periode dat Saddam de macht greep, persona non grata waren in Irak, sterker nog, door Saddam persoonlijk werden alle banden met de VS verbroken in de jaren '70, zoals deze link en vele andere laten zien.Op zaterdag 11 maart 2006 08:59 schreef ChatChewbacca het volgende:
klez, wacko, leer eens bronnen selecteren. Het is algemeen bekend dat Saddam en Amerika via de CIA vriendjes waren.
quote:Ja, die Russen waren ook eng. Meer dan 1 miljoen Afghanen hebben ze vermoord... Dus in dat licht bezien was het uitstekend dat men iemand die verzet voerde tegen de Russen steunde.Is ook bekend van onze grote Al Qaida leider. Wel eens gehoord over afghanistan? De mujahadin werden betaald door de CIA om de ó zo enge russen buiten de deur te houden.
na de oorlog zijn ze of nauwelijks gestraft hiervoor.
Een paar jaar geleden heb ik op de duitse TV een documentaire gezien die over amerikaanse bedrijven ging die geld hadden verdiend door allerhande stuff te leveren aan de duitsers. IBM is natuurlijk een bekend voorbeeld. In de docu werd ook Ford genoemd. Eén ding in daarin vond ik erg opvallend. Ford had een fabriek in Hamburg, en is zelfs nog gecompenseerd voor de schade die amerikaanse bombardementen aan de fabriek hadden gebracht. Of dat werd althans beweerd in de documentaire, of het waar is weet ik niet.
quote:Ook in 2002 gaf Hein Klemann met zijn "Nederland 1938 – 1948. Economie en samenleving in jaren van oorlog en bezetting" een beeld van de Nederlandse economie tijdens de oorlog. Hij rekent af met de traditionele voorstelling dat Nederland door de Duitse bezetter systematisch beroofd en steeds armer werd gemaakt. In de periode van mei 1940 tot najaar 1942 draaide het Nederlandse bedrijfsleven goed mee in de Duitse economie. De Nederlandse bedrijven werkten intenser mee dan de Belgische. Tot 1944 bleef de Nederlandse economie nog groeien, o.m. door handel met de Wehrmacht.
quote:bronIn the last half of 1944 German truck production was attacked. Three plants produced most of Germany's truck supply. One of these, Opel at Brandenburg, was knocked out completely in one raid on August 6, 1944, and did not recover. Daimler Benz was similarly eliminated by attacks in September and October. Ford at Cologne, the third large producer, was not attacked but records show that production was sharply curtailed during the same period by destruction of component suppliers and the bombing of its power supply. By December of 1944, production of trucks was only about 35 percent of the average for the first half of 1944.
En hier wat meer over Ford en de nazis.
Dus het is op zichzelf nog niet zo ongewoon dat amerikaanse bedrijven spul verkochten aan nazi-duitsland. Niet echt een lekkere bezigheid natuurlijk, maar om daaruit dan meteen te concluderen dat Bush evil is, omdat zijn grootvader geld aan de nazis verdiend heeft vind ik een wat grote sprong.
overigens ben ik absoluut geen fan van Bush en van zijn beleid, dat wil ik toch even gezegd hebben.
[ Bericht 0% gewijzigd door #ANONIEM op 13-03-2006 21:26:54 ]
Bush is al aan de macht en hij heeft zijn taken al flink uitgevoerd.
Het enige waar we nu nog tegen kunnen vechten is het presidentschap van Arnold Schwarzenegger.
quote:Voorlopig mag die nog niet zihc kandidaat stellen. Moet eerst de wet veranderd worden.Op dinsdag 14 maart 2006 09:29 schreef RickySway het volgende:
Het enige waar we nu nog tegen kunnen vechten is het presidentschap van Arnold Schwarzenegger.
On a happier note: Joey Cheek (olympisch kampioen 500 m schaatsen) wil in de toekomst president worden.
quote:Inderdaad, oud nieuws snap ook niet dat dit hier op Fok! enkele keren per jaar weer als hot news gebracht wordt. De halve wereld deed zaken met de nazi's en was over het algemeen tot 1939 zeer te spreken over hoe de nazi's dat land weer op de rails kregen.Op dinsdag 14 maart 2006 09:29 schreef RickySway het volgende:
none of this matters now.
quote:Zoals?Bush is al aan de macht en hij heeft zijn taken al flink uitgevoerd.
quote:Nog niet nodig zolang de grondwet niet is aangepast. Maar waarom zouden we daar tegen willen vechten? Arnold is op veel punten een stuk liberaler dan Bush en zelfs dan Clinton.Het enige waar we nu nog tegen kunnen vechten is het presidentschap van Arnold Schwarzenegger.
Opa, Papa, neefje, zoontje Bush doen er hoofdzakelijk slechte dingen mee.
TRUTH IS VOOR PARANORMALE ZAKEN NIET VOOR ERNSTIGE POLITIEKE CORRUPTIE ZAKEN
>>>> POL
quote:Ik denk dat dit topic hier prima thuishoort, de TT zegt namelijk al genoeg. Dit is namelijk geen feit, wel dat de familie Bush geld geinvesteerd heeft in Nazi Duitsland. Dat klinkt ernstig maar daar waren ze natuurlijk in die tijd lang niet alleen in.Op maandag 20 maart 2006 21:50 schreef BaajGuardian het volgende:
als je de naam Bush in een TT hebt staan gaat het automatisch naar een Paranormaal forum
waarom?
als je politieke corruptie aankaart gaat het automatisch naar een paranormaal forum
waarom?
etc.
op die manier werkt Fok! mee aan corruptie, genocide en klimaat manipulatie van honderddruizenden mensen.
Bush aan de macht door Nazi-geld is dus pure speculatie,
[ Bericht 4% gewijzigd door #ANONIEM op 21-03-2006 11:38:40 ]
quote:!!Op donderdag 9 maart 2006 14:31 schreef mrdjey het volgende:
Ik was een beetje aan het inlezen over de invasie van Nederland door de Duitsers tijdens de 2e WO. En toen stuite ik op de volgende website.
http://www.bartcop.com/421102.htm
Hier las ik het volgende stukje:
Prescott Bush received $750,000 for his share of Union Banking Corporation, a princely sum in 1951, but nothing compared to the millions the Thyssen family got back. Prescott used some of this Nazi cash to bankroll his son George Herbert Walker Bush’s first business enterprise and to support his successful bid for Senate in 1952.
Vroeg me af of dit bekent is bij de meeste mensen.
http://www.zone5300.nl/424