Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 10 of 12

Thread: To Hell with War!

  1. #1
    Join Date
    Jan 2015

    To Hell with War!

    "To Hell With War!

    I am not a fool as to believe that war is a thing of the past. I know the people do not want
    war, but there is no use in saying we cannot be pushed into another war.

    Looking back, Woodrow Wilson was re-elected president in 1916 on a platform that he had
    "kept us out of war" and on the implied promise that he would "keep us out of war." Yet,
    five months later he asked Congress to declare war on Germany.

    In that five-month interval the people had not been asked whether they had changed their
    minds. The 4,000,000 young men who put on uniforms and marched or sailed away were not
    asked whether they wanted to go forth to suffer and die.

    Then what caused our government to change its mind so suddenly?


    An allied commission, it may be recalled, came over shortly before the war declaration and
    called on the President. The President summoned a group of advisers. The head of the
    commission spoke. Stripped of its diplomatic language, this is what he told the President and
    his group:

    "There is no use kidding ourselves any longer. The cause of the allies is lost. We now owe you
    (American bankers, American munitions makers, American manufacturers, American
    speculators, American exporters) five or six billion dollars.

    If we lose (and without the help of the United States we must lose) we, England, France and
    Italy, cannot pay back this money . . . and Germany won't.

    So ... "

    Had secrecy been outlawed as far as war negotiations were concerned, and had the press
    been invited to be present at that conference, or had radio been available to broadcast the
    proceedings, America never would have entered the World War. But this conference, like all
    war discussions, was shrouded in utmost secrecy. When our boys were sent off to war they
    were told it was a "war to make the world safe for democracy" and a "war to end all wars."

    Well, eighteen years after, the world has less of democracy than it had then. Besides, what
    business is it of ours whether Russia or Germany or England or France or Italy or Austria
    live under democracies or monarchies? Whether they are Fascists or Communists? Our
    problem is to preserve our own democracy.

    And very little, if anything, has been accomplished to assure us that the World War was
    really the war to end all wars.

    Yes, we have had disarmament conferences and limitations of arms conferences. They don't
    mean a thing. One has just failed; the results of another have been nullified. We send our

    professional soldiers and our sailors and our politicians and our diplomats to these
    conferences. And what happens?

    The professional soldiers and sailors don't want to disarm. No admiral wants to be without a
    ship. No general wants to be without a command. Both mean men without jobs. They are not
    for disarmament. They cannot be for limitations of arms. And at all these conferences,
    lurking in the background but all-powerful, just the same, are the sinister agents of those who
    profit by war. They see to it that these conferences do not disarm or seriously limit

    The chief aim of any power at any of these conferences has not been to achieve disarmament
    to prevent war but rather to get more armament for itself and less for any potential foe.

    There is only one way to disarm with any semblance of practicability. That is for all nations
    to get together and scrap every ship, every gun, every rifle, every tank, every war plane.
    Even this, if it were possible, would not be enough.

    The next war, according to experts, will be fought not with battleships, not by artillery, not
    with rifles and not with machine guns. It will be fought with deadly chemicals and gases.

    Secretly each nation is studying and perfecting newer and ghastlier means of annihilating its
    foes wholesale. Yes, ships will continue to be built, for the shipbuilders must make their
    profits. And guns still will be manufactured and powder and rifles will be made, for the
    munitions makers must make their huge profits. And the soldiers, of course, must wear
    uniforms, for the manufacturer must make their war profits too.

    But victory or defeat will be determined by the skill and ingenuity of our scientists.

    If we put them to work making poison gas and more and more fiendish mechanical and
    explosive instruments of destruction, they will have no time for the constructive job of
    building greater prosperity for all peoples. By putting them to this useful job, we can all
    make more money out of peace than we can out of war -- even the munitions makers.

    So. ..I say,


    How much have things changed in the last 75 years?

  2. #2
    Join Date
    Jan 2015
    As far as I know, Smedley Butler never knew the extent of the control above the nations. It is a hard thing to learn when you have spent you life fighting and becoming a more important fighting machine to actually learn what goes on in esoteric circles bent on using people to do things those people do not even know they cannot resist.

    Who ran Hitler, here are some links. My book Hitler and the Occult has apparently added to continuing research on how political leaders are often actually run (It means what it sounds like) by occult handlers. Actually I have other books that show a lot more including how Woodrow Wilson was run right into the ground by Edward Mandell House whose father might have been a son of one of the Lafitte's (with black blood despite them starting the KKK). Both were seventh sons of a seventh son (or child rather than son).

    The Nazi Occult - Page 21 - Google Books Result

    Kenneth Hite - 2013 - ‎Games
    ... the primordial Aryan super-culture, and thus recreate Germany in its image, restoring the golden age of the Armanenschaft. Himmler and the others decided to ...

    Ariosophy - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

    The most notable other case is Himmler's Ahnenerbe. ... the sun-king: an estate of intellectuals who were organised into a priesthood called the Armanenschaft.

    Guido von List - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

    2.1 Runes and the Armanenschaft; 2.2 Millenarian views ..... the coterie of prominent Nazi Heinrich Himmler and influencing the symbolism and rituals of the SS.

    Aryan Myth and Metahistory: Heinrich Himmler`s Thor`s ...

    Mar 2, 2014 - ... Myth and History and Die Armanenschaft der Ario-Germanen blogs. ... My research indicates that Himmler`s Hammer was sold as part of a lot ...

    Nationaal Socialisme en de Tempeliers? - Stormfront

    May 14, 2007 - The most notable other case is Heinrich Himmler's Ahnenerbe. ... persecution of the Armanenschaft was Himmler's personal occultist, Wiligut.

    Internet Archive Search: subject:"Armanenschaft"
    1 * The Enigma of the Swastika 2 * The SS Blood and Soil 3 * Adolf Hitler 4 * Himmler the Mystic Synopsis The documentary contains mainly black and white as ...

    The blogspot link is not active but it is very good. I will have to add it where I have Hitler's poem and adoration to Wotan as well as a thread on Jung or Eranos.

  3. #3
    Join Date
    Jan 2015
    The House Un-American Activities Committee and the McCarthy era is worse than most people who have studied it will ever know. Everyone knows about the lies and black-balling or various other dirty tricks which are made fun of in the TV series M.A.S.H. or various other places. How many people know the USSR was supported by British and American forces selling out to whichever side gave their cronies and shadowy business connections the best economic opportunities? How many people care to investigate FDR's great gift of 80 million Eastern Europeans to Old Joe Stalin? He was far worse than Hitler who was also backed by US monied interests as well as the British King.

    Major General (Top Marine rank of his day) Smedley Butler knew the US armed forces were used to force imperialistic corporate agendas. He was a true hero in every aspect of normal life! If he had lived a little longer we would have seen what McCarthy was because Butler would not have allowed the lies to spread without some major speeches and effort.

    "The following is an excerpt from a speech he gave in 1933:

    “War is just a racket. A racket is best described, I believe, as something that is not what it seems to the majority of 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 masses.

    I believe in adequate defense at the coastline and nothing else. If a nation comes over here to fight, then we'll fight. The trouble with America is that when the dollar only earns 6 percent over here, then it gets restless and goes overseas to get 100 percent. Then the flag follows the dollar and the soldiers follow the flag.

    I wouldn't go to war again as I have done to protect some lousy investment of the bankers. There are only two things we should fight for. One is the defense of our homes and the other is the Bill of Rights. War for any other reason is simply a racket.

    There isn't a trick in the racketeering bag that the military gang is blind to. It has its "finger men" to point out enemies, its "muscle men" to destroy enemies, its "brain men" to plan war preparations, and a "Big Boss" Super-Nationalistic-Capitalism.

    It may seem odd for me, a military man to adopt such a comparison. Truthfulness compels me to. I spent thirty- three years and four months in active military service as a member of this country's most agile military force, the Marine Corps. I served in all commissioned ranks from Second Lieutenant to Major-General. And during that period, I spent most of my time being a high class muscle- man for Big Business, for Wall Street and for the Bankers. In short, I was a racketeer, a gangster for capitalism.

    I suspected I was just part of a racket at the time. Now I am sure of it. Like all the members of the military profession, I never had a thought of my own until I left the service. My mental faculties remained in suspended animation while I obeyed the orders of higher-ups. This is typical with everyone in the military service.

    I helped make Mexico, especially Tampico, safe for American oil interests in 1914. I helped make Haiti and Cuba a decent place for the National City Bank boys to collect revenues in. I helped in the raping of half a dozen Central American republics for the benefits of Wall Street. The record of racketeering is long. I helped purify Nicaragua for the international banking house of Brown Brothers in 1909-1912. I brought light to the Dominican Republic for American sugar interests in 1916. In China I helped to see to it that Standard Oil went its way unmolested.

    During those years, I had, as the boys in the back room would say, a swell racket. Looking back on it, I feel that I could have given Al Capone a few hints. The best he could do was to operate his racket in three districts. I operated on three continents.”"

    But even Butler probably did not know enough about the Beacon Hill Mob which later brought us the Bushmen and Heinz Kissinger, as well as his brother who watched over the various Foundations. One of those Foundations forced opium upon China and created Skull & Bones. You will have a hard time finding out a lot about Averill Harriman and his Jupiter Island development of Manchurian Candidate Shrub. You can find a lot more about the era of Smedley Butler in the thread detailing The Most Important Man of the 20th Century.

  4. #4
    Join Date
    Jan 2015
    There are many experiments and inventions done in wars which you might think produce good results. Some people say war has created the impetus for much of the scientific growth we now benefit from. Sad, if true; but I doubt there is no better approach to improving life non Earth. Here is one example we already touched upon.

    To listen to modern psychiatrists talk about the ECT or burning of brain cells and memory you might think it was useful and healthy with good intent. It was designed to make a soldier return to the horror show of the first world war trenches. Specifically as a torture to make them not want to avoid killing people or experiencing the constant threat of death including being shot by your own officers when and if you refused to run into machine gun fire. Actually sometimes they just picked random soldiers from the brigade or regiment which had not followed orders and shot these innocents. If a psychiatrist gets this so-called therapy his insurance will no longer be in force because it affects the mental acumen and probably also illustrates the sadistic or masochistic intent of the recipient.

    Here is part of a report given by Freud to a commission which asked for his expertise in the matter of wartime mental issues or what we called PTSD today.

    "What is known as the psycho-analytic school of psychiatry, which was brought into being by me, had taught for the last twenty-five years that the neuroses of peace could be traced back to disturbances of emotional life. This explanation was now applied quite generally to war neurotics. We had further asserted that neurotic patients suffered from mental conflicts and that the wishes and inclinations which were expressed in the symptoms were unknown to the patients themselves- were, that is to say, unconscious. It was therefore easy to infer that the immediate cause of all war neuroses was an unconscious inclination in the soldier to withdraw from the demands, dangerous or outrageous to his feelings, made upon him by active service. Fear of losing his own life, opposition to the command to kill other people, rebellion against the ruthless suppression of his own personality by his superiors-these were the most important affective sources on which the inclination to escape from war was nourished.

    A soldier in whom these affective motives were very powerful and clearly conscious would , if he was a healthy man, have been obliged to desert or pretend to be ill. Only the smallest proportion of war neurotics, however, were malingerers; the emotional impulses which rebelled in them against active service and drove them into illness were operative in them without becoming conscious to them. They remained unconscious because other motives, such as ambition, self-esteem, patriotism, the habit of obedience and the example of others, were to start with more powerful until, on some appropriate occasion, they were overwhelmed by the other, unconsciously-operating motives.

    This insight into the causation of the war neuroses led to a method of treatment which seemed to be well-grounded and also proved highly effective in the first instance. It seemed expedient to treat the neurotic as a malingerer and to disregard the psychological distinction between conscious and unconscious intentions, although he was known not to be a malingerer. Since his illness served the purpose of withdrawing him from an intolerable situation, the roots of the illness would clearly be undermined if it was made even more intolerable to him than active service. Just as he had fled from the war into illness, means were now adopted which compelled him to flee back from illness into health, that is to say, into fitness for active service. For this purpose painful electrical treatment was employed, and with success."

    Horus porous and hocus pocus were in love
    Along came Christos symbolized as dove
    Usually hawks eat doves in wars
    It's still true polity call it whores
    Of the Military Complex - rotten to it's cores
    Last edited by R_Baird; 04-01-2016 at 09:59 AM.

  5. #5
    Join Date
    Jan 2015
    While Smedley Butler was going through his catharsis of conscience and exposing how bad the government and military bedfellows and bankers are - there were many other social upswells going on. Today we can easily forget what turmoil existed in the Norman Bethunes and Upton Sinclairs of the world who saw a need for change and no venue presented true changes. Is it different today?

    Then we can wonder how a man like John Dos Passos or G. B. Shaw got taken in by rhetoric during the Stalinist era. Never has there been so many lives given for so little by so few. But will the sheep ever fight for what is right? We can sympathize with the intellectual with passion for what is RIGHT when there is no interest in learning or making a better world. The majority are sheep and content themselves with being screwed by people with high waders pushing them towards the cliff. They actually seem to enjoy having their back legs put into those boots or hearing the clickety-click of the heels when a salute is given to the next monster. The next monster might be a McCarthy or a Quisling it matters not to a person capable of reason and spiritual insight.

    "John Dos Passos (1896-1970)

    John Dos Passos is one of the most overtly political authors in this unit. Involved in many radical political movements, Dos Passos saw the expansion of consumer capitalism in the first decades of the twentieth century as a dangerous threat to the health of the nation. The son of unmarried Portuguese American parents, Dos Passos grew up in Chicago. He attended prestigious East Coast schools, first the Choate School and then Harvard University. He graduated from Harvard in 1916 and joined the war effort before the United States entered World War I, becoming a member of a volunteer ambulance corps and later serving in the American medical corps.

    Following the war he became a freelance journalist, while also working on fiction, poetry, essays, and plays. He wrote a novel drawing on his war experiences, Three Soldiers (1921), but his 1925 novel Manhattan Transfer established him as a serious fiction writer and displayed many techniques that writers who followed him would emulate. Political reform underwrote much of his fiction, and in 1926 he joined the board of The New Masses, a Communist magazine. Though not a party member, Dos Passos participated in Communist activities until 1934, when the Communists' disruption of a Socialist rally convinced him that the Communists were more concerned with achieving power than with the social reform about which he cared passionately.

    From 1930 to 1936, Dos Passos published three bitingly satirical novels about contemporary American life, The 42nd Parallel; 1919; and The Big Money, an excerpt of which is discussed in this unit. Together the novels form a trilogy called U.S.A., and they attack all levels of American society, from the wealthiest businessman to the leaders of the labor movement. Dos Passos believed that American society had been thoroughly corrupted by the greed its thriving capitalist system promoted, and he saw little hope for real reform of such an entrenched system. His novels experimented with new techniques, especially drawing on those of the cinema, a relatively new cultural form (see the Context "Mass Culture Invasion: The Rise of Motion Pictures," Unit 13). His "Newsreel" sections mimic the weekly newsreels shown before films at local cinemas, blending together a patchwork of clips from newspapers, popular music, and speeches.

    Dos Passos's politics shifted radically following World War II, as he saw the political left, with which he had identified himself, becoming more restrictive of individual liberty than the political right. His trilogy District of Columbia (1952) reexamined American society from this new perspective, attacking political fanaticism and bureaucracy."

  6. #6
    Join Date
    Jan 2015
    Smedley Butler was not around to support Einstein's call to end standing armies which was a lifelong quest of his. I certainly think he would have preferred an international body who would not be subject to the efforts of corpserists (Korten). He did address the Rockefellers but did he know about their Rothschild connections. I cannot help but think he knew about many things he did not make a big issue about on his speaking tours which were so good. After all is said and done he probably helped keep America out of the Second World War by educating enough Americans to what is behind wars, and he probably suffered (though he was dead) in image as war hype grew once more. How much did he know about eugenics?

    A history of the Rockefeller/Rothschild connection back to the Benjaminites and up to the founding of the Federal Reserve Board is a most intriguing study. The key word is 'intrigue'. We will have occasion to mention them some more but this particular insight seemed hard enough evidence of the things we speculate about with other evidence in the field of mind-control devices, Black Ops, the Opium War(s) and a great deal that everyone should know in order to try to make the future of their children as positive as possible. There is so much more I could include but perhaps this is enough for now. We should carry the torch Butler passed to us, a lot further.


    It was not until after the Nuremberg Trials that the rest of the world put the kinds of protections in place that had already been in place for a long time in Germany but we are found accusing Germans of the heinous crimes we actually lead. It is just like Mackenzie King in Canada who was backing Hitler and his programs in many areas, along with other blue bloods like the Bushes and their boss Averill Harriman who reported to others like the Pilgrims and Beacon Hill Mob.

    “Beginning in 1907, with legislation passed in Indiana, forced sterilization on the basis of eugenic doctrine began spreading across the United States, with finally thirty states having such laws on the books. In this century, upwards of 50,000 Americans have been sterilized by order of the state. {Today we have drugs that reduce the libido or sex drive and potency of the less fortunate and victimized masses. These drugs and lobotomies which are still performed in Canada serve the same purposes.} The constitutionality of such compulsion was upheld in 1927, when the case Buck vs. Bell went before the Supreme Court. With only one dissent, the court said, in a majority opinion written by Justice Oliver Wendell Holmes:

    ‘It is better for the world, if instead of waiting to execute offspring for crime, or to let them starve for their imbecility, society can prevent those who are manifestly unfit from continuing their kind. The principle that sustains compulsory vaccination is broad enough to cover cutting the Fallopian tubes.’

    The court, in other words, went beyond saying that a person is guilty until proven innocent; it declared that hypothetical persons were presumed guilty of criminal intent even before being conceived and may not be brought into existence. The 1927 decision has never been overturned, and is still a part of the law of the land.

    After World War II, German lawyers defending those accused of being Nazi war criminals for having forcibly sterilized two million people as a part of Nazi racial doctrine pointed to the sterilization laws in America and the 1927 Supreme Court decision as justification for their clients' conduct.

    In his recent book, The Nazi Connection: Eugenics, American Racism and National Socialism, Stefan Kühl traces the relationships between the Nazi racial theorists and members of the American eugenics movement in the 1930s. American eugenicists and German advocates of "racial hygiene" were already communicating and sharing ''scientific'' information before the First World War. The conflict in Europe, and particularly American entry into the war against Germany, broke off all such ties. But shortly after the war's end, contacts began to reemerge, with their American colleagues being especially helpful in getting German eugenicists accepted back into their community of scholars.

    Throughout the 1920s, the German proponents of racial sterilization drew upon the arguments of their American counterparts, using data the American eugenicists had collected to justify the case for distinguishing between "superior" and "inferior" racial types; they also made the case that America was more enlightened and progressive in its racial policies, since numerous American states had passed sterilization laws, while German law was "backward" in its narrow defense of individual rights that frustrated equivalent German legislation.

    With Hitler's coming to power in 1933, Germany's racial hygienists came into their own, with institutes for race science and research being established or expanded. They solicited articles by many of the leading American eugenicists for their "scholarly" journals, translated many of their works into German, and gave them wide distribution. The Nazis used these American books and articles to demonstrate that they were not alone in the world in advocating compulsory racial improvement and purity.

    A number of American eugenicists happily cooperated. Harry L. Laughlin, who authored the "model" sterilization law for Virginia that was then copied by several other states, saw his proposals explicitly implemented in Germany's 1933 Hereditary Health Law, that prohibited racial intermarriage and codified forced sterilization in the new Germany. As a tribute, the University of Heidelberg awarded Laughlin an honorary degree in 1936, which he enthusiastically accepted.

    Even in the late 1930s and early 1940s Science Articles, some American eugenics publications refused to criticize Nazi race policy in general or legal persecution of the Jews in particular. Some of the leading eugenicists argued that to do so would be to unjustifiably mix science with politics.” (4)

    The leader of the House Un-American Activities lynching was John Stennis who kept the real Holocaust(s) alive in his words ‘They Killed our Savior’ long after Nuremberg where the Nazis were not allowed to mount certain Synarchy defenses that might have educated the world about the truth of what happened in Germany (and Russia).
    Last edited by R_Baird; 04-03-2016 at 06:23 AM.

  7. #7
    Join Date
    Jan 2015
    Have you heard about the coup to overthrow FDR which included Butler putting an end to it? Amazingly enough it includes a Du Pont cadre associated with bankers (sarcasm).

    " This is one of the lesser known but important episodes in US history. The American Liberty League plotted to overthrow Franklin Roosevelt, sometimes referred to as the Business Plot. Some US businessmen were so opposed to the New Deal they planned to bring down Roosevelt by force using a private army and install a fascist government.

    The list of plotters included some of the most prominent businessmen in the country. Irenee Du Pont of the Dupont family, one of the wealthiest in the nation, worth hundreds of millions, was a white supremacist and founder of the American Liberty League. Grayson Murphy was the treasurer for the League, Director of Goodyear, mining and rail companies, and on the boards of Bethlehem Steel and JP Morgan. William Doyle and Gerald McGuire were both leaders in the American Legion, one of the largest veterans' organizations, one much further to the right than the VFW. John Davis and Al Smith were both former Democratic presidential candidates. John Raskob was an officer in Du Pont and the former Chairman of the Democratic Party. Robert Clark was a Wall Street banker and stockbroker who provided $15 million in funding for the plot. Alfred Sloan was the President, CEO, and Chairman of General Motors. He also owned Remington and would supplies arms for the coup as well as $300 million in funds.

    The plot was exposed by General Smedley Butler, former Commandant of the US Marine Corps. Butler was approached by Gerald Maguire, who offered him command of an army of half a million World War I veterans from the American Legion. The plan was to hand an ultimatum to Roosevelt: pose as sick while a newly created office of the Secretary of General Affairs takes over and runs the country in his name.

    What kind of a government did the League want? Gerald MacGuire was quite open that, "We need a fascist government in this country," modeled on Mussolini's fascist state, the French fascist group Croix de Feu, and Dutch fascists.

    When Butler was offered command of this army, he refused and went to Roosevelt with the details of the plot. But Roosevelt feared the arrest of famous figures such as a Du Pont on treason charges would crash the Stock Market again. Roosevelt dealt with the coup by leaking the story to to the press. The plot was publicly exposed and could proceed no further.

    The media had mixed reactions to news of the plot. The New York Times claimed it was all a hoax. Douglas MacArthur, allegedly named as the second choice for commanding the League's army if Butler refused, called the claim a joke. Congress formed a special committee to investigate. The committee never summoned almost any of the plotters. Maguire was the only one to testify. Likely, the committee feared, much like Roosevelt, that public exposure of treason by leading elites might crash the economy again.

    The committee published its report after a delay of four years. All of Butler's claims were substantiated with extensive bank records, letters, and witnesses. But the committee issued no indictments for treason as they deserved. Again, trials and convictions of elites for treason would trigger economic panic. Most historians agree there was a plot. The evidence is clear. Where many disagree is how far the plot had gone. Historian Arthur Schlesinger argued it was a “cocktail plot,” talk that was still in the planning stages.

    If the plot had gone forward, if they had found a commander who would not expose the plot, could it have succeeded? Between the world wars, the US Army only numbered 140,000, less than a third of the size of the League's army. The US government was more decentralized in 1934. State governors controlled the militias and National Guard much more than today. It took time for governors to transfer control to the President.

    But it is virtually certain Roosevelt would not back down. Rejecting the ultimatum leads to a second civil war, one likely more destructive than the first. While Roosevelt was the most popular president in US history, those opposed to him and his New Deal were a solid 35-40% of the nation. Many of them were fanatic, and some were violent. Groups like the KKK, German-American Bund, Silver Shirts, and Christian Front were fanatically anti Communist, seeing “reds” where there were none, and many also openly fascist. The League would unite all these with substantial financial backing and weaponry. The League's leader Du Pont argued for uniting “all property owners” with the Ku Klux Klan.

    We might find a model of what would happen in the Spanish Civil War at about the same time. In Spain there was a fascist coup aimed at a popular government that united the left and center. The Spanish Civil War killed from 600,000 to 1.2 million. The US population at the time was three times that of Spain. As in Spain, the great majority of the US population favored the democratic left government and would fight fiercely to hold onto it. Thus casualties from a second US civil war might have reached as high as 3.6 million.

    How would this second civil war end? In Spain, the fascist party the Falange won. They won because other fascist governments aided them while most democracies stood by and let Spain's popular government be destroyed by force. Germany sent weapons and bombers, who most infamously destroyed the city of Guernica. Italy sent weapons and troops. Both nations likely would send the same to the US.

    In Spain, the civil war was so devastating they remained neutral during World War II. Spain stayed fascist until the 1970s. Over time Spanish youth grew increasingly cynical under fascist rule and the nation returned to democracy. We might see the same for the US, neutrality during World War WII, and fascist until the 1970s.

    It is uncertain who would have been the de facto president. Du Pont was head of the League. Maguire may have been commander of the League's army and thus de facto president. One central difference between the League and Spanish fascists is that Falangists were militarists but not racists. Moorish troops took the fascist side. The League believed in not just white supremacy but eugenics.

    Eugenics was pure pseudo science, the claim that one could improve humanity by sterilizing supposed inferior peoples. Eugenics and forcible sterilization already was widely practiced in the US since 1907, in over 30 states, and had a huge influence on Nazi Germany. In most cases the targets were supposed mental defectives or criminals. But in North Carolina many poor Black women were targeted. As late as the 1970s, Native women were sterilized without their consent or knowledge.

    With the League in power, one could see eugenics widely applied to anyone not white. US eugenics included both sterilization and “euthanasia.” Euthanasia is a euphemism for mass murder by gas chambers, which were proposed by eugenics advocates but never widely practiced. Minorities could either flee to avoid mass murder and sterilization, hide in remote areas, or if possible try to pass as white.

    The US would be ethnically cleansed. For 40 years, the only remaining nonwhites in the US would either be unable to produce children or in hiding...

    It is quite possible other powers may choose to take advantage of the Second US Civil War. The Soviets under Stalin may see a chance to take Alaska. Hawaii may be taken by Japanese fascists, or the British may take Hawaii as well as Puerto Rico and the Panama Canal to prevent other powers having them.

    ... The League leaders were anti Semites. Though the League issued a public declaration against anti semitism in 1936, in fact they allied with and funded a number of organizations that hated Jews, including the Southern Committee to Uphold the Constitution, the Sentinels of the Republic, and the Silver Shirts.

    Except for nuclear war, this scenario is the most horrifying possibility in American history that luckily never came true. Even a Confederate victory in the Civil War leading to slavery continuing does not end in as high a death toll. The US population in 1940 was almost 132 million, about 116 million of them white. That means as many as 16 million nonwhites may be sterilized, executed, or have to flee, hide, or pass as white.

    It is virtually impossible to guess how those numbers would break down. The chaos of a recent civil war might make it easier to flee and more difficult to be tracked down. Sterilization was much more widely practiced by eugenics advocates than execution, so mass deaths might not happen until later. or at all. The isolation of many rural Black, Latino, and Native communities might protect them, but it also might make it more difficult to hear of the coming atrocities in time to escape.

    I often teach my students that this episode actually shows just how much of a difference one man can make. One man, Smedley Butler, prevented this by simply speaking out. It should make a fitting epitaph for him, “He saved America from fascism.” This episode should be taught as evidence of the worst side of America's right wing and business leaders.

    Al Carroll is Assistant Professor of History at Northern Virginia Community College, a former Fulbright Scholar, and the author of Presidents' Body Counts.... More information on him is at"
    Last edited by R_Baird; 04-03-2016 at 06:20 AM.

  8. #8
    Join Date
    Jan 2015
    There are disturbing facts being bandied about by people who are disturbing. I am not going to draw the line from Du Pont to Lafitte and the KKK which I have exposed. It is not either black or white but people like those who follow would make it seem to be something it is not. You can find these matters here already as well as Bernard (DuPont and GM) Baruch's role in 'handling' FDR and letters from Col. House and FDR talking about the shadow government they knew so well.

    The link which follows makes me somewhat sorry to post it, but it includes a video of Smedley Butler and it is not simple BS even though it throws babies in bathwater and wraps current Bush business into past transgressions more than reality might truly deserve.

  9. #9
    Join Date
    Jan 2015
    The next invective has a communist party ring to it, but the facts are worth considering even though many US acts in Latin America have been useful and moral, and today Colombia and Cuba are poised to reap more benefits. Again, I say - there is nothing wrong with Globalization if alongside of it, we have a plan which makes sense for the true benefit of all people on Earth. Errors have been made, greed has been uppermost, but the future can be different if people are willing to learn or at least let informed people decide what needs to be done - step by step.

    "- We see U.S. capitalism intensifying its economic penetration of the continent, dictating austerity budgets and privatization programs to various governments, pressuring countries to accept such treaties as the Central American Free Trade Agreement, the Andes Free Trade Agreement, the Free Trade Area of the Americas and various bilateral treaties which aim at virtual U.S. annexation of Latin America.

    History of U.S. Intervention

    Before going more deeply into some of these sharpening immediate struggles, I want to review some of the background of U.S. intervention in Latin America. This history helps us see where present-day problems come from, helps us see that the super-exploitation and war against the peoples of Latin America is built into the very foundations of present-day U.S. capitalist-imperialism and that for more than 100 years this colonialism has been the bipartisan program of both the Democratic and Republican parties.

    From the very founding of the U.S. republic, U.S. capitalism expressed an appetite for Latin America. For example, by proclaiming the Monroe Doctrine in 1823, the U.S. government declared that the entire Western Hemisphere was its sphere of influence and warned European powers to stay out.

    But in its early days, U.S. capitalism, despite its appetite, did not have the power to project itself too far. This changed around the turn of the 20th century as the era of monopoly capitalism and imperialism began.

    U.S. capitalism emerged as a major imperialist power by waging the so-called "Spanish-American War," which really was a war waged by the U. S. government against the peoples of Puerto Rico, Cuba and the Philippines who were already fighting for their independence from Spain. Through this war, the U.S. imposed direct colonial rule on Puerto Rico and Cuba (as well as the Philippines), marking the beginning of the wholesale export of U.S. capital and U.S. marines to Latin America - the beginning of U.S. economic and, to a large extent, territorial domination of the continent.

    This colonial project was codified by President Theodore Roosevelt in his famous "Roosevelt corollary" to the Monroe Doctrine which asserted U.S. imperialism's intention to intervene in the internal affairs of Latin American countries to control their economic and political systems.

    Roosevelt's doctrine reads, in part:

    "Any country whose people conduct themselves well, can count upon our hearty friendship. If a nation shows that it knows how to act with reasonable efficiency and decency in social and political matters, if it keeps order and pays its obligations, it need fear no interference from the U.S. Chronic wrong-going or an impotence which results in a general loosening of the ties of civilized society, may in America, ... require intervention by some civilized nations, and in the western hemisphere the adherence of the U.S. to the Monroe Doctrine may force the U.S... to the exercise of an international [police] power."

    These early years of "gunboat diplomacy" are well described by a U.S. General - Smedley Butler, who writes in his memoirs: "I spent 33 years and four months in active service as a member of our country's most agile military force - the marine corps. I served in all commissioned ranks from a second lieutenant to major-general. And during that period I spent most of my time being a highclass muscle man for Big Business, for Wall Street and for the bankers. In short, I was a racketeer for capitalism .... Thus I helped make Mexico and especially Tampico safe for American oil interests in 1914. I helped make Haiti and Cuba a decent place for the National City Bank to collect revenues in . . . I helped purify Nicaragua for the International Banking House of Brown Brothers in 1909-1912. I brought light to the Dominican Republic for American sugar interests in 1916.

    I helped make Honduras "right" For American fruit companies in 1903." (quoted from Eduardo Galeano, "Open Veins of Latin America," 1971).

    In fact, over the years, U.S. government has waged hundreds of wars and military interventions against the peoples of Latin America and these wars have been waged by every administration, Democratic and Republican.

    A partial list of some of the major U.S. wars since the 1950's includes:

    - in 1954 CIA-trained U.S. troops invaded Guatemala to carry out a coup against the Arbenz government and reverse the country's agrarian reform which went against the economic interests of United Fruit;

    - in 1959 the U.S. began widescale covert intervention against Cuba after the revolutionary government undertook land reform and the nationalization of certain U.S.-owned enterprises. Over the years, U. S. intervention has resulted in the murder of hundreds of Cuban activists, workers, peasants, and students by U.S. covert operatives. {It is worse than they say. The US put Batista in charge and the Mafia role is seen in Godfather movies more than taught or explained anywhere. The Coppolas had a great home in Belize and Francis had up close insight.}

    In 1961 the U.S. launched the "Bay of Pigs" invasion, and later Kennedy threatened Cuba with nuclear war, etc.;

    - in 1965, some 50,000 U.S. troops invaded the Dominican Republic;

    - in 1973 the CIA-organized a coup in Chile which overthrow the elected government and resulted in the murder, imprisonment and exiling of tens of thousands of Chileans;

    - in the late 1970's and throughout the 1980's, U.S. advisers on the ground directed the counter-insurgency war in El Salvador which resulted in 80,000 killed and 1.5 million Salvadorans exiled.

    - in the 1980's, the CIA directed the "contra war" against Nicaragua which claimed the lives of 30,000 people;

    - the 1983 invasion of Grenada by 30,000 troops in 1983;

    - in 1985 invasion of Panama.

    In sum, for more than 100 years, U.S. imperialism has imposed a series of fascist, military regimes on the peoples in Latin America and has been in a permanent state of war against the continent.

    Just as today the U.S. government, in its war against Iraq, can rely only on doublespeak to advertise its aggression as "defense of democracy," to label its destruction and devastation of Iraq as "preventing chaos," etc., so too all the war and fascism imposed on Latin America by U.S. imperialism has been carried out in the name of "freedom" and "democracy."

    At the time of the Monroe Doctrine, Henry Clay, Secretary of State, justified U.S. imperial ambitions by calling for "a human freedom league encompassing all nations from Hudson Bay to Cape Horn."

    The U.S. wars against the Puerto Rican and Cuban people were waged in the name of "bringing freedom and civilization" to the people.

    The invasions of Guatemala and Grenada were carried out in the name of "restoring democracy." The contras mercenaries and the paramilitary death squads in El Salvador, Colombia and elsewhere are called "freedom fighters" by the leaders of the U.S. government.

    The 1965 invasion of the Dominican Republic like the ongoing occupation of Haiti are justified as a means to "prevent chaos and anarchy."

    The U.S. blockade of Cuba and its plan for armed intervention are given such names as the "Cuban Democracy Act" and "Assistance for a Free Cuba." The U.S. government works to destabilize the elected government in Venezuela by branding President Chavez as a "dictator."

    The truth is that the path to democracy for peoples in Latin America is and can only be the path of struggle against U.S. imperialism - against its subversion, aggression, and support for internal reactionary regimes.

    For the American people, a very touchstone of our commitment to genuine democracy is resolute, uncompromising struggle against any and all interference by the U.S. capitalist-imperialist government in Latin America. The touchstone of genuine American democracy, a vital part of opposition to the colonialism, racism and war program of "our own" government is to struggle to get U.S. imperialism out of Latin America, lock, stock and barrel!"

    You can see Batista was a court reporter and Colonel when he took power and began ferreting billions of dollars abroad. He was a CIA recommended asset as a mere Sergeant when FDR was advised to back him. There is much more to this story which goes way back in time past Jean Lafitte and Columbus. I have touched upon a little of it here in relation to Copperheads and the FOGC.
    Last edited by R_Baird; 04-08-2016 at 08:44 AM.

  10. #10
    Join Date
    Jan 2015
    Armies have always been a venue for the worst kind of behavior. I often say in the Dark Ages or Empire-building era (we are still in) of the last 5,000 years, rape and pillage was a major motivation and form of pay. I know there are many prison guards who still get pay in this form. I know that because my 'twin' was a top person in California Prison Reform after having spent two years in prison being raped and having her fortune stolen. She was given a Governor's pardon because she had never been guilty and the FBI knew she knew how to prove the guilt of the Mafia people she had worked for. They simply did not want to have to capture these people so she could testify safely against them. The Mafia people had threatened to kill her kids! Perhaps you will think that is a stretch to compare with being in the army of a Caesar or General Wolfe. His father bought him his Generalship from the day he was born. The higher the rank the higher the percentage of pillage and booty one had a right to. If you were paid up for 20 years you were assured of a fortune if any war was to be waged. Yes, it made for a booming black market which my father was part of in WWII. Perhaps you wonder how sexual dysfunction is related to this part of the Cycle of Violence or to the Heresy Trials and autos da fe. Maybe you can see how we give war heroes political positions and they do not want to expunge these elements of belief and behavior from our society because they were guilty of rape or sexual abuse of authority when they were Generals. Heck, you might even be capable of saying the priests are not guilty of what they are often found doing - I don't know you. I know I find the existence of nations and religions as well as any borders to be something of a travesty - and yet I acknowledge we do need good management, given how stupid people are and how they enjoy having power rather than caring for each other.

    "For example, during my military service, we started raising the issue of the connection between the violence of the occupation and violence against women, because in Israel, men who serve, even after their mandatory military service, have their weapons in their home until they’re 55. There were many murders of women—intimate partner violence, which they used to call in Israel crimes of passion—that were actually done with weapons provided by the state.

    And also, the conflict impacts the perpetrators of violence, in terms of the militarization of masculine identity. So feminists should care because this conflict, like any other conflict, has gender dimensions.

    The other issue is because BDS is a movement that emerged in response to a call for solidarity. Palestinian women’s groups were part of that broad civil society group that called for solidarity. And the call came in 2005. So it took a decade for the international community to respond, including feminists. That’s too little too late.

    For me, BDS is not an end to itself—it is a means to an end. And the end is to create a just and equal society on this land that is Israel and Palestine. So both by engaging in this discussion and being part of the movement, transnational feminists, feminists in Israel and Palestine, begin to articulate—what would a post-Apartheid Israel-Palestine look like? So we don’t end up with something written on paper, like the South African constitution, but with really unbelievably high rates of sexual violence, and no accountability.

    Aviva: Can you talk a little bit about some of the parallels between Israeli Apartheid and the campus sexual assault crisis?"
    Last edited by R_Baird; 04-23-2016 at 04:52 PM.

Tags for this Thread

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts