Not to mention that the Germans targeted and sank US Merchant Vessels prior to the US entry into WWII.
One would wonder why Germany would sink US Merchant ships if they were carrying "arms" to the Germans themselves? Deep sea salvage practice?
The casual arming of the idiot cousins in the country directly south of Canada.
- Thread starter LordPongo2009
- Start date
Not to mention that the Germans targeted and sank US Merchant Vessels prior to the US entry into WWII.
One would wonder why Germany would sink US Merchant ships if they were carrying "arms" to the Germans themselves? Deep sea salvage practice?
Or lets not forget the USS Kearny.
My best guess is, it was all a great big conspiracy. Black ops donchya know.
You couldn't hear anything before, so what else is new. I figured I would have better luck with bold for emphasis.. It appears not. Go back to the post where all my links refused to open and see that link there first.
Why not actually attempt to read the linksI Why not put the same effort into reading those links rather than dis my writing style.
I believe you will find that a post in all capitals are assumed to be shouting. Bold is for emphasis.
Because you weren't saying anything.
Another lie? You sure are full of it. I can see why though. I took apart the links that worked. Something you cleverly ignored.
I did. I offered a rebuttal to the ones that worked. You just went off ranting and crying about people not wanting to be educated. While you ignored my reply, complete with how the material in your links didn't support your claims.
Again, I did just that.
True, so you should stop. It just looks silly.
This might just help you post a link that works instead of having us look around and you take the credit for us finding one that works;-)
How to post a link on Techkings vbulletin forum. - YouTube
So simple to paste into the link box instead of the general message area.....Thanks
How to post a link on Techkings vbulletin forum. - YouTube
So simple to paste into the link box instead of the general message area.....Thanks
Is this spam? It's for a book you already linked us to. I've read a good portion of it. In my opinion, he makes several leaps in logic as well as some pretty serious leaps to connect people to events and institutions, with a pretty wide and unbalanced brush.
Great more spam.
What are these links supposed to tell us? Buy books? That's spam.
And pretty darn generalized offering of material to support your claims.
Still doesn't work.
Doesn't work.
And yet another.
And another.
Really? Let me start with the first error...
This was no secret. In fact, you posted a link yesterday about the very fact that Prescott Bush worked for the UBC, a bank owned by the Thyssen family.
So which is it. A big secret or not?
Next, in the same paragraph no less...
He didn't have to transfer his Nazi assets, because there were none. He was imprisoned by the Nazi's shortly after Krystallnact, for defying the Nazi party and openly showing disdain for what they had begun. And had all his assets seized.
Furthermore, the UBC, where Prescott worked for Thyssen, had already been seized by the Feds in the US, as well as all his other US holdings.
Just because he helped Adolf rise to power, doesn't mean he was a Nazi. He spoke openly in contempt of the 'final solution' and Hitlers disastrous economic policies, had his property and German accounts seized, and was imprisoned. His distant relatives that your article so shamelessly marches around. Were Nazi appointees. Sympathizers to their cause. Unlike Thyssen.
After the war, his West German assets and what was left of his fortune was returned, both in Germany and the US. He paid 500,000marks to the reparations committee.
Then your article goes on to dismiss all manner of facts, making stuff to connect the dots, before it makes this completely false claim...
There was never any seizer of Bush holdings. It was Thyssen assets that were seized in the US. Those assets were not returned to the Bush family they were returned to Thyssen.
Let me ask you this. If the Bush family was American, why would their assets be being held by the "Alien property custodian"?
Think about it for a minute and let me know.
I can go on and on, but I really am wasting a lot of time pulling your links apart.
Jesus Christ! The first sentence in that link dispels parts of your last link!!!
How could the US not know about Thyssen's foreign assets, in 45/49, when they had already seized some in 42?
Can you not see the absurdity in your links now?
Hows that for facts, I just took your facts apart, with your own facts.
Last edited:
hmmm.......I earned everything I own. It had nothing whatever to do with luck. It had to do with bloody hard work, and long, long hours. So useless to attempt guilt trips.
[/FONT][/FONT][/FONT]
.......................
Sorry luv, I have your number now, and I will no longer attempt to justify having presented what I found interesting and had enough of a money trail to be credible. I will not whine, and I do not cry. Actually, I am quite fed up defending what I passed on.
You do not like my links and l do not like your notion of logic nor the type of twisty slants you apply. So don't bother pulling apart anymore links. Keep your love of the Bush family and their highjinks. Watching the performance these past weeks of those with the same politcal leanings, displaying the same disregard of those who put them into office I intend to return to my garden and pool. There I make a difference.
The only thought I will leave you with, having read the English & French versions of Canadian history, as I presume you have, I am sure you agree, they bear no resemblance one to the other. It could be about two entirely different countries. An economist follows the money trail and that is very hard to twist with a personal bias, and that is an transferable quality in history books.
Oh and everyone of those last links worked at the time I posted them. Perhaps because they go back a fair bit, they are archived. It doesn't matter in anycase if you can read them or not, does it??
Last edited:
Nobody has denied that the U.S. was selling arms to both sides before we actively entered the fracas. It was the attack on Pearl Harbor that sunk Hitler, he did not want war with us at least at that time. Hitler's big mistake (among others) was thinking that Japan could beat the U.S., then help him defeat Russia. But sooner or later the U.S. would have actively supported Great Briton.
What is this casual arming, there is nothing casual about it. President Obama must think we are a stupid people when he tries to disarm us and arm the Mexican drug cartels. Notice how that whole "Operation Fast and Furious" is kept on the back burners. Just remember this in November 2012.
I am!
What arms were we selling the Germans? If we were selling the Germans arms why were they sinking US Merchant ships prior to our entry into WWII?
The Merchant Marine act of 1936 was enacted to further promote the commerce of the US This non-governmental force was busy doing exactly that!! It was free to do this because it was not working for the government. Only in times of war was it obliged to aid in National Defense. Since the war for the US did not start until 1942, they were operated by the private sector.
They sustained more casualties than any other arm of the US forces during the war and were not even granted veteran status until 1988!!
I am not sure if this indicates that the public sector of the Merchant Marines were more honorable than some members of the US government or they were out to make money. From the casualties they suffered, I go with the Marines and their honour. When one's country insists they are neutral and their privately operated & funded commerce force is participating in moving supplies in a war zone, then of course they will be attacked. They were the enemy not the US.
This does not prove that members of the US government or any of it's industries,were not moving money around or laundering it in order to help Germany's rearming effort.
They sustained more casualties than any other arm of the US forces during the war and were not even granted veteran status until 1988!!
I am not sure if this indicates that the public sector of the Merchant Marines were more honorable than some members of the US government or they were out to make money. From the casualties they suffered, I go with the Marines and their honour. When one's country insists they are neutral and their privately operated & funded commerce force is participating in moving supplies in a war zone, then of course they will be attacked. They were the enemy not the US.
This does not prove that members of the US government or any of it's industries,were not moving money around or laundering it in order to help Germany's rearming effort.
Ahhh the USMC and the merchant marine are two very different things....
Here you go, the whole smoozle......
UE News Feature: Nasty Nazi Business - Corporate Deals with Nazi Germany
Enjoy.
Especially this bit:
That is well over a year before the USA was at war with Germany.
Last edited:
Wanna bet that a claim will be made that this link has already been posted? (broken of course);-)Ahhh the USMC and the merchant marine are two very different things....
Here you go, the whole smoozle......
UE News Feature: Nasty Nazi Business - Corporate Deals with Nazi Germany
Enjoy.
Yeah....my point is simple.
China is a quickly-expanding quasi-fascist state.
We are not at war with China.
However, military confrontation with China is, in my opinion, practically inevitable.
So tell me, Blue Bird, should we be trading with China??????
I think not.....but I am in a tiny minority.
If you think so, than to criticize the USA for trading with a nation while they were a neutral is somewhat.....hypocritical.
China is a quickly-expanding quasi-fascist state.
We are not at war with China.
However, military confrontation with China is, in my opinion, practically inevitable.
So tell me, Blue Bird, should we be trading with China??????
I think not.....but I am in a tiny minority.
If you think so, than to criticize the USA for trading with a nation while they were a neutral is somewhat.....hypocritical.
1942! Can you get one thing right!?
Pearl Harbor was attacked on December 7, 1941!
Geez!
US WWII War Dead
Army- 234,874
Navy- 36,958
Marines- 19,733
Merchant Marines- 9,521
In other words... Wrong again Bluebyrd!
Canadian Corvettes Sink First U-boat: 10 Sept 1941
On the night of 9 September 1941, Convoy SC-42 had sailed past the south coast of Greenland. Four Royal Canadian Navy (RCN) corvettes, HMCS Moose Jaw, HMCS Chambly, HMCS Kenogami, and HMCS Skeena, escorted the convoy. That night, a well-coordinated German submarine attack claimed seven merchant vessels and an eighth was torpedoed as the sun rose.
The attacks subsided during the day of 10 September, but, as dusk fell, the German submarines renewed their assault on Convoy SC-42. Captain Chummy Prentice of the RCN corvette HMCS Chamblyanticipated that the enemy would attack the convoy from the south. Together with the corvette HMCS Moose Jaw, the Chambly moved to intercept the German submarines. Almost immediately, Prentice's ASDIC (a type of sonar that used sound to locate submerged submarines) team reported the location and depth of a U-boat. Prentice ordered the crew of the Chambly to execute a fast attack with five depth charges. Within minutes, the heavily damaged German submarine U-501 struggled to the surface.
The captain of the Moose Jaw, Freddie Grubb, ordered his crew to ram the damaged vessel, but the small corvette merely glanced off the submarine's hull. As the Moose Jaw pulled back, the Chambly drew alongside the stricken submarine, and Lieutenant Ted Simmons led a boarding party onto U-501. Simmon's goal was to seize the German code books and code machines. The German captain, however, had already opened the submarine's hatches, and U-501 quickly sank. The incident claimed the lives of 11 German sailors and a member of the Canadian boarding party.
Although U-501 was the first confirmed sinking of German submarine by a RCN corvette, the situation of Convoy SC-42 continued to be dire. The German U-boats continued their relentless attacks, and the convoy lost an additional eight ships the following night.
On the night of 9 September 1941, Convoy SC-42 had sailed past the south coast of Greenland. Four Royal Canadian Navy (RCN) corvettes, HMCS Moose Jaw, HMCS Chambly, HMCS Kenogami, and HMCS Skeena, escorted the convoy. That night, a well-coordinated German submarine attack claimed seven merchant vessels and an eighth was torpedoed as the sun rose.
The attacks subsided during the day of 10 September, but, as dusk fell, the German submarines renewed their assault on Convoy SC-42. Captain Chummy Prentice of the RCN corvette HMCS Chamblyanticipated that the enemy would attack the convoy from the south. Together with the corvette HMCS Moose Jaw, the Chambly moved to intercept the German submarines. Almost immediately, Prentice's ASDIC (a type of sonar that used sound to locate submerged submarines) team reported the location and depth of a U-boat. Prentice ordered the crew of the Chambly to execute a fast attack with five depth charges. Within minutes, the heavily damaged German submarine U-501 struggled to the surface.
The captain of the Moose Jaw, Freddie Grubb, ordered his crew to ram the damaged vessel, but the small corvette merely glanced off the submarine's hull. As the Moose Jaw pulled back, the Chambly drew alongside the stricken submarine, and Lieutenant Ted Simmons led a boarding party onto U-501. Simmon's goal was to seize the German code books and code machines. The German captain, however, had already opened the submarine's hatches, and U-501 quickly sank. The incident claimed the lives of 11 German sailors and a member of the Canadian boarding party.
Although U-501 was the first confirmed sinking of German submarine by a RCN corvette, the situation of Convoy SC-42 continued to be dire. The German U-boats continued their relentless attacks, and the convoy lost an additional eight ships the following night.
From Wiki:
"Mariners died at a rate of 1 in 24, which was the highest rate of casualties of any service.[15] All told, 733 American cargo ships were lost[16] and 8,651 of the 215,000 who served perished on troubled waters and off enemy shores." So % wise, they really did
suffer greater loses than other services.
I do know the difference between 1941 and 1942 ........typo errors are possible. My arguments are based on what I feel is morally and ethically right. How is it, that for many of you, typo and technical loopholes mean more?
As for China yes, most of the world does trade with them. So, I guess at this point, it is legal for private industry to conduct business as usual because war has not been declared. But what if some private industries sell chemicals or nuclear capability to anyone who can pay for them even against a country's foreign policy?? Is this still legal??
Roosevelt began rearmament of the US in 1938 but he came up against strong opposition from Borah & Taft. He aligned the US with Britain and the Allies during this time but had not officially entered the war. So, as I understand what several of you are saying, private industry was and should be free to work against the interests of the country and it's foreign policy.
No wonder the world is in such horrible shape. Isn't this sort of thinking that led Bush to believe there were WOMD in Iraq?? How was he to know, that Hussein felt himself so secure he never bothered to build them, even though it was known he had the wherewithall to build them. Does anyone wonder how come they knew this?? And of course Iraq sitting on all that oil had nothing whatever to do with the decision to invade.
My personal feeling it is wrong to deal arms and weapons with regimes who make no attempt to conceal their aggressive intentions.
I don't think private industry should have the right to sell nuclear materials or weapons to societies with violent tendencies. There is a difference between having the ability to defend one's country and aggression against another.
But heck, I understand certain governments continue to pay mercenaries to do their dirty work. . Sort of like hiring hit men. Gives deniability for awhile, until someone traces down the money trails.
Anyway, you'all have your ideas just as I have mine on what is honourable and right.