The casual arming of the idiot cousins in the country directly south of Canada.

[bluebyrd35]

Eagle,

This exerpt comes from the Washington Post.... "Ford & GM scrutinized for "Alleged" Natzi Collaboration."

The Washington Post: National, World & D.C. Area News and Headlines - The Washington Post

LOL, Silly!! Come on, try accepting that there were and are those who feel they have the right to do as they wish, even in the Good Old US of A.!!




"When American GIs invaded Europe in June 1944, they did so in jeeps, trucks and tanks manufactured by the Big Three motor companies in one of the largest crash militarization programs ever undertaken. It came as an unpleasant surprise to discover that the enemy was also driving trucks manufactured by Ford and Opel -- a 100 percent GM-owned subsidiary -- and flying Opel-built warplanes. (Chrysler's role in the German rearmament effort was much less significant.)When the U.S. Army liberated the Ford plants in Cologne and Berlin, they found destitute foreign workers confined behind barbed wire and company documents extolling the "genius of the Fuehrer," according to reports filed by soldiers at the scene. A U.S. Army report by investigator Henry Schneider dated Sept. 5, 1945, accused the German branch of Ford of serving as "an arsenal of Nazism, at least for military vehicles" with the "consent" of the parent company in Dearborn.

The whole article is there for reading.

Oh by the way, what do you think about China protesting the infringement of their borders by US spy planes. And hey that is not old news. What is the matter with the US Military. Do they want a war with China now, just so they do not have to pay back the debt they owe there?

How do you suppose the US would react if a foreign country sent a spy plane over it's borders??

My Gawd, what would happen to the US currency if China dumped their holdings of it onto the world markets today??

 

[DaSleeper]

What some fail to realize that anyone in the U.S., trading with Germany during the conflict of WWII was not commiting an illegal act, until the US officialy declared war in Dec. 1941.
At which point the government was obligated to and did seize assets.
A point oft forgoten by those with an agenda........

 

[bluebyrd35]

What some fail to realize that anyone in the U.S., trading with Germany during the conflict of WWII was not commiting an illegal act, until the US officialy declared war in Dec. 1941.
At which point the government was obligated to and did seize assets.
A point oft forgoten by those with an agenda........

.

Ah but some were still doing it in 1942 and according to the last article in 1944!! Exactly what is your agenda?? Mine was simply to point out that "The US were dealing arms to both sides during WWII" Since WWII for the world began in 1939, doesn't alter the fact that "the US did indeed deal arms and supplies to both sides during WWII" while they sat on the fence.

It is really tiresome to have to keep repeating adnauseum, so once more, please understand, no matter, whether it was legal or illegal in the US to double deal, it was still done!! I don't give a damn whether it was legal or illegal in the US. It was in my opinion morally and ethically reprehensible.

 

[DaSleeper]

If you don't disagree with my point....why do you keep arguing while writing in bold all the tme?

 

[CDNBear]

.

Ah but some were still doing it in 1942 and according to the last article in 1944!! Exactly what is your agenda?? Mine was simply to point out that "The US were dealing arms to both sides during WWII" Since WWII for the world began in 1939, doesn't alter the fact that "the US did indeed deal arms and supplies to both sides during WWII" while they sat on the fence.

No they didn't. Not one single credible article has even remotely shown tangle proof of that.

It is true that Ford, GM and even Chrysler to a certain extent were manufacturing vehicles in Nazi Germany. But just like there is a separation between the Canadian and American auto manufactures now, it was the same way then.

Once war was declared by Congress, any and all remote ties were severed. Any direct profit from, or support of would have been illegal.

And if you have difficulty understanding that. You may want to look into how the Israeli's successfully sued the German arm of those manufactures. While the American arm was shielded, by having no involvement in the day to day operations, nor having made any profit from them, after the declaration of war.

It is really tiresome to have to keep repeating adnauseum, so once more, please understand, no matter, whether it was legal or illegal in the US to double deal, it was still done!! I don't give a damn whether it was legal or illegal in the US. It was in my opinion morally and ethically reprehensible.

You seem to have difficulty separating a business entity and the nation.

I can understand how your hate has blinded you to reality, but please do try and remain within our solar system while you spin out of control.

 

[bluebyrd35]

If you don't disagree with my point....why do you keep arguing while writing in bold all the tme?

Oh boy, that's rich. Put the shoe on the right foot. Just exactly how does your point even relate?? Pretty hard to see it when it does not address my main contention!! " Did the US or did it not deal arms and materials to both sides before 1939 and afterwards." Yes it did. Pointe Finale!!

Are they dealing arms and materials to both sides of other wars going on now. Who knows, after all there are a few countries, they haven't declared war on and that makes it legal, not right but legal. What is to stop those Americans, who would deal arms and materials to Al Quaida by setting up a branch of their company or corporation in an Al Quaida friendly country.

So I got my bold button stuck on, that is legal isn't it?

 

[CDNBear]

Oh boy, that's rich. Put the shoe on the right foot. Just exactly how does your point even relate?? Pretty hard to see it when it does not address my main contention!! " Did the US or did it not deal arms and materials to both sides before 1939 and afterwards." Yes it did. Pointe Finale!!

No it didn't.

Unless you have some new revelation unknown by a litany of real historians.

 

[DaSleeper]

No it didn't.

Unless you have some new revelation unknown by a litany of real historians.

I see another deflection or goal post movement coming:smile:

 

[CDNBear]

I see another deflection or goal post movement coming:smile:

You spelled "bowel" wrong...lol

 

[bluebyrd35]

No they didn't. Not one single credible article has even remotely shown tangle proof of that.

It is true that Ford, GM and even Chrysler to a certain extent were manufacturing vehicles in Nazi Germany. But just like there is a separation between the Canadian and American auto manufactures now, it was the same way then.

Once war was declared by Congress, any and all remote ties were severed. Any direct profit from, or support of would have been illegal.

And if you have difficulty understanding that. You may want to look into how the Israeli's successfully sued the German arm of those manufactures. While the American arm was shielded, by having no involvement in the day to day operations, nor having made any profit from them, after the declaration of war.
You seem to have difficulty separating a business entity and the nation.

I can understand how your hate has blinded you to reality, but please do try and remain within our solar system while you spin out of control.[/QUOTE)


So truth to you means hate?? Okay....so which one of us has lost touch with reality??

As for remote ties being severed, after war was declared, no it wasn't. Understand that the rest of the world was engaged in stopping Hitler's bid for world domination since 1939. The one time when the US should have declared war, it didn't!! Heck you guys were getting rich dealing with both sides. You keep saying after the declaration of war, as though the war was not going into it's 3rd year when Pearl harbour was bombed.

You may fool yourself on legalities and turn on the righteous indignation or even infer my view of reality is skewed; but it won't change the facts that if Japan had not bombed Pearl Harbour, the US would have continued it's policy. Would it have cozied up in the end with the Hitler the conquerer?? Or would Hitler have simply moved in and taken over??

 

[CDNBear]

So truth to you means hate??

Nope. Believing something completely false, to uphold a negative image, is pretty much the definition of bigotry. And you can't have that without hate.

Okay....so which one of us has lost touch with reality??

That's easy. You.

Otherwise you would have posted the proof to your claims, and be done with it.

As for remote ties being severed, after war was declared, no it wasn't. Understand that the rest of the world was engaged in stopping Hitler's bid for world domination since 1939. The one time when the US should have declared war, it didn't!!

Because the American people didn't want to get involved. The US couldn't unilaterally declare war without provocation.

Heck you guys were getting rich dealing with both sides.

I guess the meaning of the abbreviation CDN is lost on some.

You keep saying after the declaration of war, as though the war was not going into it's 3rd year when Pearl harbour was bombed.

Just because you don't understand how things work, nor have a reasonable grasp on timelines and history in general. Doesn't mean that I do.

I keep saying that, because the US was not at war, until the attack on Pearl. Thus making any and all trading legal in the eye of international and domestic law. Not that it was American foreign policy at the time. They were openly neutral, while they secretly armed the Allies.

The USS Kearny is something you should look up.

Regardless, you still seem unable to differentiate between private businesses and industry and American foreign policy.

You may fool yourself on legalities and turn on the righteous indignation or even infer my view of reality is skewed; but it won't change the facts that if Japan had not bombed Pearl Harbour, the US would have continued it's policy.

I do not infer your view of reality is skewed, I'm saying it out right.

And your opinion is just that, an opinion.

Would it have cozied up in the end with the Hitler the conquerer?? Or would Hitler have simply moved in and taken over??

I have no idea, but don't let that stop your imagination from conjuring something that sates your ideological necessities.

 

[JLM]

Oh boy, that's rich. Put the shoe on the right foot. Just exactly how does your point even relate?? Pretty hard to see it when it does not address my main contention!! " Did the US or did it not deal arms and materials to both sides before 1939 and afterwards." Yes it did. Pointe Finale!!

Are they dealing arms and materials to both sides of other wars going on now. Who knows, after all there are a few countries, they haven't declared war on and that makes it legal, not right but legal. What is to stop those Americans, who would deal arms and materials to Al Quaida by setting up a branch of their company or corporation in an Al Quaida friendly country.

So I got my bold button stuck on, that is legal isn't it?

Please post your source.

 

[CDNBear]

Please post your source.

Don't hold your breath. You're asking the same guy that said this was almost impossible to find.

Google "Bush family did business with Nazi's"

26,700,000 hits. One's even a wikiality hit, lol.

Bush Family did business with Nazi's

Not that it is at all relevant. Prescott worked for the Union bank Corporation. Which had the misfortune of being owned by the Thyssen family. Other than that, there is absolutely no evidence he was a Nazi supporter of any kind. Not to mention, there's a huge reason Thyssen came out of the reparations suits unscathed and owning Krupp. He turned his back on Adolf and his insanity when it became evident during the Crystal Night.

 

[bluebyrd35]

Don't hold your breath. You're asking the same guy that said this was almost impossible to find.

Google "Bush family did business with Nazi's"

26,700,000 hits. One's even a wikiality hit, lol.

Bush Family did business with Nazi's

Not that it is at all relevant. Prescott worked for the Union bank Corporation. Which had the misfortune of being owned by the Thyssen family. Other than that, there is absolutely no evidence he was a Nazi supporter of any kind. Not to mention, there's a huge reason Thyssen came out of the reparations suits unscathed and owning Krupp. He turned his back on Adolf and his insanity when it became evident during the Crystal Night.



http://www.google.ca/search?q=us so...gc.r_pw.&fp=5abc0ef7e7ce69d8&biw=1366&bih=621

CDNBear....About Eagle.....none of this dame's statements ever have links. States things as facts with no backing whatever.
Here are a couple of links, for those who realize WWII did not just start when the US declared war. Inspite of some people's beliefs, just because a country enters a war 1/3 of the way through does not change the date it began.

As for Thyssen, one of those links listed below actually deals with how he outsmarted the judges at his trials and came away a very rich man with all his banks intact.

http://www.whale.yo/b/brussell1.3html.

UE News Feature: Nasty Nazi Business - Corporate Deals with Nazi Germany

Dupont - Facing the Corporate Roots of American Fascism

http://www.reformation.org/wall-st.ch5.html

http://en.wikipedia/wki/IBM_and_the_Holocaust

http://www.thenation.com/article/Kodak-nazi-connections

http://www.fantompowa.org/editorial_warhtml#two These persons, are very obvious in their dislike of US deviousness.


Hitler and German industry secured very large loans from US Bankers and financiers throughout the late 30's in fact even after the war broke out and as German tanks were driving though Poland George Bush's Grandad was in New York securing another massive loan for Germany.

Are there enough links yet?? I can find several hundred more if anyone is interested. By the way, much of this information is coming from the National Archives.

JML enough sources for you??
Eagle, sure, you found that first link soooo easy to find......AFTER I posted it.

 

[CDNBear]

CDNBear....About Eagle.....none of this dame's statements ever have links. States things as facts with no backing whatever.

That's because he's right and really doesn't care what you think.

Here are a couple of links, for those who realize WWII did not just start when the US declared war.

I know when WWII started.

Inspite of some people's beliefs, just because a country enters a war 1/3 of the way through does not change the date it began.

It does for the country in question, no matter how much your silliness has blinded you to reality.

As for Thyssen, one of those links listed below actually deals with how he outsmarted the judges at his trials and came away a very rich man with all his banks intact.

Ya, he really out smarted them. The Nazi's ousted him from the party and imprisoned him for speaking out against their policies about Jews. Real smart, getting those Nazi records fabricated eh?

http://www.whale.yo/b/brussell1.3html.

404 error.

UE News Feature: Nasty Nazi Business - Corporate Deals with Nazi Germany

Still doesn't support your claim that the US was getting rich off both sides. In fact, it supports my position that you're wrong...

But the GE-Krupp deal came to an end as a result of a lawsuit — and an embargo the U.S. government clamped on shipment of money to the Nazis.

Dupont - Facing the Corporate Roots of American Fascism

Still nothing. A scathing endictment of DuPont, but nothing about the US supplying both sides of the war effort.

http://www.reformation.org/wall-st.ch5.html

404 error.

http://en.wikipedia/wki/IBM_and_the_Holocaust

404 error.

http://www.thenation.com/article/Kodak-nazi-connections

Page not found.

http://www.fantompowa.org/editorial_warhtml#two

404 error.

These persons, are very obvious in their dislike of US deviousness.

That's because, like you, they can't differentiate between US foreign policy and private industry.

Hitler and German industry secured very large loans from US Bankers and financiers throughout the late 30's in fact even after the war broke out and as German tanks were driving though Poland George Bush's Grandad was in New York securing another massive loan for Germany.

Got a link? I have several to Congressional investigations that cleared Prescott.

Are there enough links yet??

Can you post some that work, and are on topic to your claims?

I can find several hundred more if anyone is interested.

I'm interested, but only in facts, can you try and skip past the Op/Ed links and 404 error links?

By the way, much of this information is coming from the National Archives.

Ya, I saw a couple references to Library of Congress archive numbers. Sadly though, they don't exist.

Eagle, sure, you found that first link soooo easy to find......AFTER I posted it.

I found it with extreme ease. I think it took something .28 seconds according to Google.

 

[DaSleeper]

One does get tired after a while , clicking on links that don't work or trying to get into someones head that it does not matter when the war started for everybody else.....for the U.S. it started December 1941 Period end of story...the US did not trade with their enemy.

 

[CDNBear]

http://www.thenation.com/article/Kodak-nazi-connections

OK I got this one to work after tweeking the addy.

It still doesn't prove what you opine.

It clearly states that Eastman Kodak US, did not trade directly with Nazi Germany, and that there is no evidence that they had any control of their German operations.

Where their satellite branches did purchase material from Germany, there is no proof that the US office profited.

You appear to be stretching here.

http://www.reformation.org/wall-st.ch5.html

I'm still trying to find the story you linked to, but in the process I found this one at the same site...

The world has just stopped spinning!

But I still look forward to reading the article you wanted me to.

 

[DaSleeper]

OK I got this one to work after tweeking the addy.

It still doesn't prove what you opine.

It clearly states that Eastman Kodak US, did not trade directly with Nazi Germany, and that there is no evidence that they had any control of their German operations.

Where their satellite branches did purchase material from Germany, there is no proof that the US office profited.

You appear to be stretching here.

I'm still trying to find the story you linked to, but in the process I found this one at the same site...

The world has just stopped spinning!

But I still look forward to reading the article you wanted me to.

I think He/She meant this one.... Wall Street and the Rise of Hitler by Antony C. Sutton

But it's a long read.....An E-Book....if it was in PDF I'd download it to my reader...

Finaly found the one He/She did mean CHAPTER FIVE: I.T.T. Works Both Sides of the War

But mine is better and after I read it it might even prove His/Her point omygod!!!:lol:

 

[CDNBear]

http://www.whale.yo/b/brussell1.3html.

Is that supposed to be

OPERATION CHAOS The CIA's War Against the Sixties Counter-Culture by Mae Brussell, November 1976

Odd how similar the two url's are, except the 'y' having replaced the 't'.

Almost as if someone changed it, thinking others wouldn't do a little leg work.

At any rate, it was an interesting article on the CIA in the 60's, and operation CHAOS.

Not sure what that has to do with your claim that the US was profiting from both sides of the war effort.

 

[bluebyrd35]

Well, I give up. I read every bloody one of those links before posting them and I got into them. So at this point, I don't give a darn if those links work or not.

I suspect there would not be enough evidence in the world, including outright confessions, to convince any of you. However,the rest of the world is not deaf, dumb and blind and I guess most Americans will probably always wonder why most other countries don't trust them much.

Oh yes, I am certain, you believe all those stories to be lies and that big corporations of a country should be allowed to do business
without any responsibility to anything but a bottom line.

In closing, do you remember all the nasty rhetoric coming Canada's way when we refused to go into Iraq?? Where was the respect for our neutral stance?? And we were not involved in selling arms to them at any point. What is legal and still as evidenced here, thought to be morally right and ethical by some Americans, (thank goodness a minority) those rights end at the border.