[Mehntswx]

How Bush's grandfather helped Hitler rise to power - surely it cannot be true?

http://www.guardian.co.uk/usa/story/...312540,00.html

[palantownia]

It can not be true. Just yellow pages.
Amazing "western press" hunting for the new sensations again.

[Alexeryy]

That's almost 4 years old. Yes, there were Nazi connections it is certainly true. Is it surprising?

[WumibBesowe]

Another question might be: What American business DID NOT play with Hitler pre-1938 ?

[ArrichMer]

I saw some dumb article in the post linking him to vlad dracula, princess diana, obama, cheney, dillenger and countless others, he must be related to me as well.

[HelenTay]

Some interesting snippets ...... of course I think the Bush family are a incurruptible beacon of light & hope to all of us that hold freedom and democracy dear to our hearts. Their unselfish desire to serve the American people is a wonderous sight to behold and it illustrates so vividly that there are still some decent people left in the world who can put aside the trappings of personal gain in order to exemplify all that is good about the human spirit ...

http://www.zmag.org/Sustainers/Conte...9bagdikian.cfm

http://www.americanprogress.org/issu...06/b99415.html

http://www.fromthewilderness.com/fre...1_carlyle.html

[hhynmtrxcp]

Puts him in good company. Joseph Kennedy played ball with der fuhrer as well...

[LeaderBiz]

Just about anybody with money was trying to make more by doing business with Germany in the 30s.

[illerlytoindy]

Puts him in good company. Joseph Kennedy played ball with der fuhrer as well... dtolman, what do you mean he 'played ball'?
Were there financial ties and investments, as in the case of the Bushes? or just the statements he made in correspondence with Nancy Astor and comments to some other people? "paly ball' is a little vague if we're going to include him with swine like the Bushes. I'm not disputing, just wanting more facts.
I'm curious to know, if you have more detailed info on this, do tell. I couldn't find anything in a brief search but you may have information I don't.
Otherwise, merely making some bigoted remarks is not the same as funding the Nazi regime.

[Peptobismol]

Were there financial ties and investments, as in the case of the Bushes? or just the statements he made in correspondence with Nancy Astor and comments to some other people? "paly ball' is a little vague if we're going to include him with swine like the Bushes. I'm not disputing, just wanting more facts. Wikipedia has a short, but good summary. Basically, as the ambassador to the UK, he actively lobbied on behalf of the Nazi's: he was a prime supporter of the "appeasement" policy, denigrated Churchill's warnings, kept trying to get permission to meet with Hitler, etc. This continued all the way up to his boneheaded interview in 1940 where he declared that "democracy is finished in England".

If it was up to Kennedy, the US would have tried to ALLY with the Nazi's, instead of fighting them... once the fighting began he protested that fighting them was futile. Just imagine - before 1940 he was thought of as future presidential material - ick!

Oh yeah - and thats not even mentioning his support for Franco in the spanish civil war - he's one of the reasons Roosevelt decided to stay out of it!

[tobaccoman]

^
You could just as well say that in supporting the appeasement policy, Joe Kennedy was lobbying on the behalf of British PM Neville Chamberlain, not the Nazis.

The US attended the Berlin Olympics in 1936, adding legitimacy to the Third Reich. Were we all lobbying for the Nazis?

Well, all except Jesse Owens, who gave Adolf a bad headache.


Joe Kennedy's views, while ultimately proven wrong, were not uncommon in the 1930s. But I don't know of any evidence that he had any sort of relationship with Nazi Germany, financial or otherwise.

[hHwJ229h]

How true is this info on JPK as reported by Sherman H. Skolnick? Skolnick -- a parapalegic, a Jew and the founder of the "Citizen's Committee to Clean Up the Courts" -- died in 2006. He might be a crackpot ...

World War Two started when the Germans invaded Poland, September, 1939. Three weeks AFTER that, Rockefeller's Standard Oil of New Jersey and the German chemical octopus, I.G. Farben, made an unholy deal to share patents, royalties, and deals all during the war via neutral South American countries like Columbia. To make it seem legal, they arranged to fraudulently back-date the deal to THREE WEEKS BEFORE THE WAR STARTED. Who brokered and arranged this? Why, Joseph P. Kennedy, the pro-Hitler U.S. Ambassador to London until October, 1940, and "Founding Father" of the Kennedy clan. See: "The Crime and Punishment of I.G. Farben" by Joseph Borkin. I.G. Farben had a secret arrangement with the top U.S. Military brass, not to bomb any of Farben's facilities during the war. At the close of the conflict, Farben's facilities were 93 per cent untouched and intact.

A U.S. Military officer wrote a heavily documented account of Farben being not bombed. See: the book "I.G. Farben" by Richard Sasuly, Boni & Gaer Publ., N.Y. N.Y, 1947.

With Joseph P. Kennedy having a strong financial link to Hollywood, he ORDERED some 50 of the leading screenwriters NOT to write anything about the Nazi concentration camps. See: Ben Hecht's book, "Child of the Century", Simon & Schuster, N.Y. N.Y., 1954, page 520.

[zdlupikkkdi]

The Rudolph Hess thing sort of gives it away.

[Uvgsgssu]

^
You could just as well say that in supporting the appeasement policy, Joe Kennedy was lobbying on the behalf of British PM Neville Chamberlain, not the Nazis.
...
Joe Kennedy's views, while ultimately proven wrong, were not uncommon in the 1930s. But I don't know of any evidence that he had any sort of relationship with Nazi Germany, financial or otherwise.

Just because his love of fascism didn't get him the meeting with Hitler that he so craved, doesn't mean he didn't have a relationship. Joe Kennedy went beyond just neutral or sympathetic towards fascism - he was so convinced of the superiority of the fascist system that he would do anything to avoid conflict with them - and actively lobbied Roosevelt on that basis. At least poor Neville realized eventually that the UK had to make a stand - and did with Poland.

But Kennedy kept on telling everyone he could find _even after war had broken out_ - as a major public official of the US no less - that fascism was going to wipe the floor of democracy in open conflict (which would collapse into fascism itself, since fascism was clearly the superior model). And I doubt many other US officials were busy trying to cut a deal with Germany to get a separate peace for the US and the UK, and let Germany have the rest of Europe.

Bush might have financed the war machine - if politicians like Kennedy had his way, Hitler would've won WW2 without dropping a bomb or firing a shot.

[cakaeroryrere]

^
You are talking about Kennedy's political philosophy. That was not the question asked relating to this topic and "playing ball."

[justashonglefan]

dtolman, though I agree wholehartedly with your comments, it must be noted that by entering the war the military-industrial corporate state (a neccessary component of fascism) was formally enacted (aided and abetted by deficit spending) along with other industrial subsidies. This state/corporate partnership thrived during the cold war and can be credited with many of our more fascist political and cultural tendencies.

Taken with knowledge of the Business Plot of 1933 and the contemporary actions taken by the Nazi government there is little doubt there was a palpable movement among monied interests within the United States to bring this country toward fascism. Because of FDR's socialist redistribution of wealth and initial opposition to Keynes' economic suggestions against balancing the budget, -- the banking and industry giants just weren't making enough money.

[Mymnnarry]

I consider kissing Hitler's ass and being his effective proxy in the US govt "playing ball". Maybe some don't. Its certainly all academic since the respective parties are long dead, and I don't think anyone really thinks that JFK or George Bush I/II are/were nazi sympathizers...

[farmarrl]

Jasonik - I would also note that at the same time the US was creating corporate/state partnerships, it also created government structures that were previously associated with Socialist or Communist societies. But outside of the reactionary/libertarian movements in the US, I don't think anyone would mistake this country for Scandinavia or a Soviet republic.

In any case - I don't think it seriously altered the structure of power in the US. Monyed interests have wielded huge influence since colonial times - the Federal govt and states have always been in competition for power... as long as our government is comprised of squabbling levels and branches of govt competing against themselves for power, the Federal Republic remains secure.

[Dr. Shon Thomson]

Even if he did, let's not forget many people misjudged Hitler. There were also many fans of Stalin on the left in the 1930s. And of course, many people who are very descent in West Germany were Nazi collaborators before they realized how bad they were and it was too late because they were already in power. That's why the subject creates so much emotion.

And I think George W would argue liberals are making this mistake now - they want to build a WTO membership for Iran and he would argue that will give rise to a Hitler-ish regime. Personally, I don't believe that, but it's always easy to judge things in hindsight - I'm more interested in the present.

[Evoncalabbalo]

Jasonik - I would also note that at the same time the US was creating corporate/state partnerships, it also created government structures that were previously associated with Socialist or Communist societies.

Hence my use of the descripive "FDR's socialist redistribution of wealth."
But outside of the reactionary/libertarian movements in the US, I don't think anyone would mistake this country for Scandinavia or a Soviet republic. Who's mistaking this country for another?

In any case - I don't think it seriously altered the structure of power in the US. What "it" are you referring to here? I'm not arguing that power lost out.
Monyed interests have wielded huge influence since colonial times - the Federal govt and states have always been in competition for power... as long as our government is comprised of squabbling levels and branches of govt competing against themselves for power, the Federal Republic remains secure. As the time referenced was in the midst of the Great Depression -- a monetary and market crisis, the federal reserve and investors basically held the country hostage until FDR adopted deficit spending. What these forces essentially did was rather than having to get labor or consumption out of each person in the economy (and therefore a profit) they instead decided to "charge rent" on the money the government put into circulation, -- maximizing profits and minimizing risk as the government was the debtor.

Not that novel a method of exerting control over the country -- a patently Hamiltonian approach.