Disgusting Profits by Armament Companies

Be with JOY, that is more than enough.

Namaste

I have much to say, but I feel this isn't the place. I respect your views on life and it's purposes. I can neither agree nor disagree with your views, they are not my experience(s). I have much joy in my life, and above all the capacity to create more, what more could anyone ask ? I just pointed out "empty spirituality" because I have seen it first hand.

scheiber6923 -- INTIMACY is defined (by some) as taking committed action "together" along the same path while sharing the same goals.

I'm joyous with sharing the road with diversity of ALL types, even those going the other direction.

I myself view this LIFE experience as PRIMARILY that of my non-physical spirit animating my physical form with presence, so it is a foreign idea for me to consider your comment "I was so busy being “spiritual” I didn’t realize that I was losing myself". Perhaps there is abundant value still along that path for you (now with tempered wisdom, and a chance to forgive yourself)?

I have no agenda for conversion, although I do freely offer advice for those interested, as part of my committed action for change. 'I'm just here to point out where the stream is Ma'am, don't know if you're thirsty'.

Persevere and Blessing upon your journey noticing the contrasts and please do endeavor to be filled with (surrender to) joy and peace. You deserve it, your life does matter.

Namaste

Hmmm, Thanks for your thoughtful words. Everything is bad and good. Mother Theresa was pro-peace and yet still fostered the myth that some God should be in charge of human reproduction. That in itself has caused much non-peace within individuals bound to the myths of their particular flavor of belief. I'm ready to get rid of all belief and focus on truth. But, I've been down that road. I had a beautiful peaceful illusion while someone ripped my youth out from under me. I was so busy being "spiritual" I didn't realize that I was losing myself, and almost, my life. If it works for you, I'm glad, there is room for both the visionaries and the realists. I don't think the two should spend time trying to convert the other, it's enough to share our viewpoints, and walk the path side by side, wherever that leads.

From within a context, any resistance just perpetuates or persists the problem.
Fighting against injustice
______ ≠ _______
crusading for justice

BEing anti-WAR
______ ≠ _______
BEing pro-PEACE

BEing anti-SLAVERY
______ ≠ _______
BEing pro-CIVIL RIGHTS

I am sad for what happened to you scheiber6923, and hope that wherever you ARE, that the problem didn't somehow re-create itself (as too often is the case).

I doubt that your relationships would have stayed the same, especially based upon the tone of what you wrote -- very likely you wouldn't tolerate a boundary violation. This means that you're a different person today, and that you have chosen that your experience will be free of such dominance, open, and peaceful.

The above three inequalities, might appear to the "left-brain" to be (parsed as) semantically equivalent, and many people would make that mistake. In fact most would likely argue that their autonomous brains know the difference between an affirmation and a negation -- but sadly that is NOT _ T R U E _ -- and this itself is the cause of much of people's suffering on this planet.

The real myth that should be in question is that our autonomous (sub-conscious) brains can tell the difference, but NEGATION is not part of that sub-reality world view or context.

Mother Teresa is well known for taking the stand against participating in any anti-war cause, as she is wise enough to realize that pro-peace is what is effective.

Your 2 ¢ does matter, and you are correct that being a good person is NOT enough to ensure that only good things happen to oneself.

CASE [I]. Being good, and making good choices is NOT a guarantee that one IS acting from a context that is freely and joyously given to the present moment (often it is from perceived obligation or authoritarian expectation that has become internalized). Here one may resent "having" to do good acts, and thereby feel bad.

CASE [II]. On the other hand, when one is aligned in BEingness with joyous exuberant contextual goodness, proper actions may appear the SAME as CASE [I], but herein the undercurrent of LIFE's vibrant energy supplies something much more. Here one would feel bad if they didn't do the good acts, as they're a natural part of being fully human.

Although this may sound LaLaLa'ISH and causing wasted effort to get to the same place, consider that accessing and aligning with the life's force in CASE [II] perhaps would eliminate much of human suffering. The beauty and poetry that you recognize in my words, is nothing other than my own avoidance of getting in the way of a meaningful communication to you (and of course others), the beauty and poetry exists as part of the non-physical universe which we ALL tap into every second of everyday (regardless if we believe in it or not). This is part of the hidden truth of BEing alive.

Much more is available on such subject, for those ready to receive the knowledge, which I sense that that may be the case for you. Please click here and download the free Abraham lectures.

Namaste
… … … … … Mahatma Gandhi … & … ML King … … Inspiration … … … … …
« We must be the change we wish to see in the world »
« There is a sufficiency in the world for man’s need but not for man’s greed »
« We adopt the means of nonviolence because our end is a community at peace with itself » — MLK

IMO it's a myth that all we have to do is be good people, and good things will happen. I was a good, but abused, woman for 15 years. The relationship our governmnet has with the US public is much the same. It's not good enough to just be good or kind, we must stand up and fight injustice and be strong in those things we know to be right. How many more humans have to die while we all sit around waiting for the good-ness to catch on ? I appreciate your perception of beauty and the poetry of your words, Namaste, but we have to do real things, and fight real battles instead of just trying to dream the world into a better place. Just my 2 cents of course.

Ethics start much closer to each of us than DC.Look into a mirror,
and either ethics meets with you,
or ethics beats upon you …
(or you see nothing at all)

CHOOSE better, and start a new day for thereupon miracles grow along that road.

Namaste

You know I used to work for a large conglomerate telecommunications co. Every now and then this company would run huge sweepstakes and due to "Conflict of Interest" clauses in our contracts, neither we nor any members (immediate or not) of our family were allowed to win such prizes. I propose this, let's have such clauses for our politicians, when it comes to political decisions. Let's see what happens when the people making the decisions are unable to profit from the outcome in any way financially. I propose that the political landscape will become a much different place. If I'm wrong then I'm wrong, and Jake Newton can claim victory.

A better reference about Snell and the so called "streetcar scandel". Snell himself is the author:

http://www.lovearth.net/gmdeliberatelydestroyed.htm

"References please?"

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Great_American_Streetcar_Scandal

White Bread & Hot Air

Such inspired input and output
Does consumption proceed
or follow flatulent air?
Is it id-ridden
or embedded?

What can be done to take charge
of both ends?

"By 1931, Opel was owned 100% by GM. Do a wiki search."

You must mean this article:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Opel

A six year old would find this statement: "1940 – Nazi regime seizes control of Opel factories, ends all civilian production. "

and "1942 – General Motors writes off Opel as a complete loss."

and "1948 – General Motors reasserts control over surviving Opel assets."

WTF said:
"blessed with enormous capital after the GM buy-out"

And subsequesnt theft by the Nazis. It's getting pretty hard to see how GM benifitted from the ME262 production in any way(which was a pretty badass looking plane BTW)

Quick review: You had said originally "The German GM group developed and built motors for the Messerschmidt 262 ”. You said it as a fact. Yet the "evidence" presented thus far falls a bit short of proving that. doesn't it?

jakenewton wrote: The only place I see that statement on the web is “Corpwatch”.

You need to look harder. On my first Google search for a citation, this received the #2 hits.

Bradford C. Snell, American Ground Transport: A Proposal for Restructuring the Automobile, Truck, Bus and Rail Industries. Report presented to the Committee of the Judiciary, Subcommittee on Antitrust and Monopoly, United States Senate, February 26, 1974, United States Government Printing Office, Washington, 1974, pp. 16-24.

As to be expected of a 1974 document, the text is not online from the National Archives, but freely available for you to look at it.

You had said “The German GM group (whatever that is) developed and built motors for the Messerschmidt 262 ” when the best you have is that GM was involved in some factory upgrades before Germany became the enemy of the US

The following could also be found by an intelligent 6-year old:

The first serial production engines Jumo 004B-1 was ready in early 1942 ... In summer 1943 the serial production of these engines was started at Junkers Leipzig and at the Opelwerke at Russelsheim. A total of 7916 Jumo 004B were built by Junkers Flugzeugwerke plus an unknown number of engines at Opel.
http://tanks45.tripod.com/Jets45/ListOfEngines/Junkers/Junkers.htm
Junkers did its jet R&D at Magdeburg, where incidentally, Fritz von Opel (founder of Opel, and freshly blessed with enormous capital after the GM buy-out) conducted many tests in jet and rocket motors. His team worked with Junkers.

Opel and Junkers were German companies.

True, but Opel has been a subsidiary of GM since 1929. By 1931, Opel was owned 100% by GM. Do a wiki search.

Finally: Bradford Snell, a do gooder US attorney who is better known for charging the auto industry with improprieties around issues with electric street cars and the Interstate Highway system. I’m guessing Bradford didn’t like the automobile industry for some reason.

References please?

"His grandfather made millions off of investing in the Nazi banks."

It's not exactly clear how this is true, or how much:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Prescott_Bush#Nazi_collaboration

Has anyone heard the name Franz Josef Strauss before? He was the mastermind behind Airbus.

I don't know the particulars of the Airbus deal in the US, but do have some idea how Airbus operates - from the mouth of Pat Martin:

The question as to whether there was political interference in the Airbus purchase for Air Canada has taken us on a long circuitous journey, a journey where we have learned of a parcel of rogues perhaps unparalleled in Canadian history. We have witnessed the dark underbelly of Ottawa, some place that I never care to go again, some place frankly that nauseates me as a Canadian, as it would offend the sensibilities of all good people in our country who expect better from their public office-holders.

Our research took us back to a disturbing period in Canadian history where foreign money undertook a silent coup in Canada. Franz Josef Strauss, premier of Bavaria, a man who the media in his country calls an unrepentant Nazi, and also the CEO of Airbus, rigged the 1983 Conservative convention to unseat Joe Clark and six months later put in place Brian Mulroney. That alone should have been enough to horrify Canadians. They should have taken to the rooftops to scream their derision over this political interference by foreign powers, an unrepentant Nazi from a foreign country running roughshod over our democratic process in Canada.

This was orchestrated by the team that put Brian Mulroney in place: Walter Wolf, Karl Heinz-Schreiber, Frank Moore, Gary Ouellet and the Doucet brothers. Yet Brian Mulroney claimed he had absolutely nothing to do with the Airbus purchase. However, as soon as he was in power, put in place by this dirty money from an unrepentant Nazi, one of the first things he did was fire 13 of the 15 members of the board of directors of Air Canada and put in place 13 Conservative allies, one of whom was Frank Moores, the chief lobbyist for Airbus.

We also took note that the CEO of Air Canada at the time was Pierre Jeanniot. Where did he retire to? As soon as the Airbus purchase was officially announced in 1988, Mr. Jeanniot retired to Toulouse, France, home of Airbus. It was an odd choice, coincidence, I suppose.

http://www2.parl.gc.ca/HousePublications/Publication.aspx?Language=E&Mod...

According to what Pat Martin says, Krupp is related to Thyssen - Thyssen is the company GWB's grandfather did business with.

The reason I say “phantom lobbying” is because the very company he says that he was lobbying for, ThyssenKrupp, the arms of Krupp, did not know that Brian Mulroney was on its payroll. We have all read our history books on the second world war. Those are the guys who armed the Nazis and they now own one of the largest companies in the world in terms of arms dealers. How Brian Mulroney could be lobbying for such a huge international corporation and how a huge corporation like that did not know that a former head of state of a G-7 nation was on its payroll, defies credulity, and some of us on the committee simply cannot accept that without some more proof.

We asked Mr. Mulroney to please present some documentation to prove that he did meet with the leaders of China, Russia and France to earn the $300,000 he was given. Some of us think that was awfully rich compensation for three brief meetings with three heads of state, but it also begs the question as to why Mr. Mulroney would he be trying to sell tanks to China right after Tiananmen Square when he was so outraged and we had international agreements to not arm those Communist countries at that time. The story simply begs for further investigation and validation.

There were plenty of war profiteers during World War II (as in all wars). Many companies that made a "killing" in WW2 are still around today. Just as GWBush. His grandfather made millions off of investing in the Nazi banks. They didn't care then how they made their money, and they don't care now, as long as it keeps on flowing.

Just ask the author of this article...I'm sure he could tell you who is who....

"allegedly a couple GM board members stayed "

I think I see now. That charge was *alleged* by one Bradford Snell, a do gooder US attorney who is better known for charging the auto industry with improprieties around issues with electric street cars and the Interstate Highway system. I'm guessing Bradford didn't like the automobile industry for some reason.

the contrast is just peachy keen today, I do so love to become enthralled in the glistening reflections of source pouring into source … as Ram Das said, the baby drinking milk is like god pouring god into god.

JAKE never leave us, we need you to exist and thrive.

Without your inquiry we'd just BE droll and mundane, and all grey'ed out.

Just where would music be,
if either the notes or
silence betwixt
were to depart?

"Opel was the largest provider of materiels to Junkers."

Opel and Junkers were German companies.

You had said "The German GM group (whatever that is) developed and built motors for the Messerschmidt 262 " when the best you have is that GM was involved in some factory upgrades before Germany became the enemy of the US, and that allegedly a couple GM board members stayed in Germany afterward. I don't see the relevence of the last point even if true. If they were engineers that might be something.

Check this out http://www.scorecard.org and see who are the biggest polluters on the planet.

yummmmmm......

Opel was the largest provider of materiels to Junkers.

"3 of the 4 Americans on the Opel Board of Directors remained in Germany, on the BoD for the duration of the war. None were charged for treason at war’s end."

Citation?

"Less well known are the simultaneous contributions of their foreign subsidiaries to the Axis Powers. In sum, they maximized profits by supplying both sides with the materiel needed to conduct the war…….Due to their multinational dominance of motor vehicle production, GM and Ford became principal suppliers for the forces of fascism as well as for the forces of democracy."

Too bad the Senate Comittee didn't explain or provide any citation either. The only place I see that statement on the web is "Corpwatch". LOL!

"you are a troll."

You have no idea what a troll is. I will admit to being a troll when you admit that the public comment area on CD is a back slappin' high fivin' agreement fest where all acceptable ideas go unchallenged.

"Your modus operandi on CD is that when you are exposed as clearly blowing hot air, you attempt to derail the conversation by demanding proof or other subterfuges. "

LOL! Yes, I ask for proof here a lot. I am amazed you would have a problem with that.

@jakenewton

I always feel compelled to help young, undeveloped minds. Another tidbit:

That company [Opel] at the time had been siezed [sic] by the Nazis.

3 of the 4 Americans on the Opel Board of Directors remained in Germany, on the BoD for the duration of the war. None were charged for treason at war's end.

I challenge you to find that. I can find many references, some going back as far as 1942.

Oh, and this little statement by the United States Senate Committee on the Judiciary in 1974:

The activities of General Motors, Ford and Chrysler prior to and during World War II...are instructive. At that time, these three firms dominated motor vehicle production in both the United States and Germany. Due to its mass production capabilities, automobile manufacturing is one of the most crucial industries with respect to national defense. As a result, these firms retained the economic and political power to affect the shape of governmental relations both within and between these nations in a manner which maximized corporate global profits. In short, they were private governments unaccountable to the citizens of any country yet possessing tremendous influence over the course of war and peace in the world. The substantial contribution of these firms to the American war effort in terms of tanks, aircraft components, and other military equipment is widely acknowledged. Less well known are the simultaneous contributions of their foreign subsidiaries to the Axis Powers. In sum, they maximized profits by supplying both sides with the materiel needed to conduct the war.......Due to their multinational dominance of motor vehicle production, GM and Ford became principal suppliers for the forces of fascism as well as for the forces of democracy.

"why don’t you go to a library and read the books."

The "Trading With the Enemy" book is unavailable at both my *huge* library and my *enormous* local bookstore chain.

I am *very* interested, WTF, in your comments regarding the relation to GM and the *Junkers* Juno 004 engines used on the ME262.

Here's an interesting article on the *Junkers* Juno 004 engine that was used in the ME262:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Junkers_Jumo_004

Was there any relation between Junkers and GM?

@jakenewton

I have no problems with the link. Perhaps you should also try a different browser as well as a different search engine. I hear that the Fox News "search" button is a little myopic.

I provide references as you asked. Instead of having others do more work, why don't you go to a library and read the books. The ball is clearly in your court to discredit the references that I gave.

Alas, you are incapable of doing that, because you are a troll. Your modus operandi on CD is that when you are exposed as clearly blowing hot air, you attempt to derail the conversation by demanding proof or other subterfuges.

Just go away.

Anyway WTF, when you said this:

"The German GM group developed and built motors for the Messerschmidt 262 "

The closest thing you have been able to provide for that was that GM helped upgrade the Opel factor before Germany bacame the enemy of the US. It's not the same thing. That company at the time had been siezed by the Nazis.

" But thank you, since you have motivated other bloggers to post useful sources of information.":

Please explain then the relationship between GM and ME262 motors as you understand it. Thanks in advance.

"Here is another one on the History News Network:"

Makes no reference to ME 262. The other link you provided is completely unworkable, providing numerous "unavailable for viewing" errors. Maybe you or someone would paraphrase or cut and pate relavent passages, including references cited in the book.

The people who run the war industry, those who work for them, and those who buy stocks from the producers of arms are all guilty of the misprisonment of felony murder.

It is uncanny how these people can sleep at night with so many deaths on their hands.

"crickets … crickets …"

I went to the gym asshole.

RE: - The fact that Boeing lost the big con-
tract to Airbus was a coup within a coup, and
if that flies, the supranational corporations have
won and nobody will know who owns what.

That is the way Airbus operates! See the stuff posted on Mulroney / Schreiber. Karlheinz Schreiber was an arms dealer who did deals on behalf of Thyssen Industries, Airbus and MBB - which answers part of your question.

RE: - The numbers do matter as well.

Of course, but all one has are estimates before the conflict ends and there have been accounts of entire towns emptied of people (or of an entire group of people) and speculation as to what happened to the people who used to live there. Some of them managed to flee, but we don't know how many were that lucky. And some of those who have fled have since died elsewhere either of starvation or because there was no safe place for them to flee to.

You seem to be casting certain insinuations as to the motive for the use of the specific number - as if those who use the higher estimate of civilian deaths tend to have different vested interests than those who use the lower estimate. The number of civilian deaths may say things about how the US (and those they have chosen to work with) have handled this illegal war. The number also indicates whether we are just dealing with minor and unavoidable collateral damage, willful slaughter of innocents or full blown genocide.

RE: - I never claimed Wall Street has no influence in politics, thanks for your effort.

I can pick anything on this. Much matters how much Wall Street is used as a metaphor or whether we are talking about corporate types that are actually located on this particular street. The term Wall street can include those affiliated with those on Wall Street but who are not actually located there on that particular street. Just like the term "Chicago boys" refers to those who were influenced by Milton Friedman's ideas but who may have been taught elsewhere by one of his students or who may just have read one of his books and participated in the implementation of Milton's ideas.

The whole Wall street argument is a bit of a diversion.

RE: - It is proven now that oil companies PAID scientists to conduct research and promote findings which cast DOUBT on the subject just to provide “the other side of the story.

Strange that some of the scientists used to dispel global warming are the same ones who promoted the idea that smoking doesn't cause cancer.

Spartanladkenny, I'm watching yours so here's mine (which you have probably seen already):

The Denial Machine
http://www.cbc.ca/fifth/denialmachine/video.html

There is a link between the battle against the environment and war - in that, in both cases, damage to land and people matters much much less than one's ability to profit from said damage.

Have you seen Life and Death in Kandahar - that child sort of makes one think that even a small number of such incidents are too many:

http://www.cbc.ca/fifth/lifeanddeathinkandahar/video.html

Come fellow Americans, let us reason together.
By their fruits, ye shall know them. The one
area of manufacturing that did not get outsourced
was airplanes, missiles, inertial guidance and
gyroscopic development, bombs, smart bombs,
stealth technologies, etc. etc. These have comprised the largest amount of American exports
for years and their protection has been under the
personal protection of State and
Commerce. The fact that Boeing lost the big con-
tract to Airbus was a coup within a coup, and
if that flies, the supranational corporations have
won and nobody will know who owns what. According
to a friend of mine who was high in the Congressional Budget Office some years ago, no
body really understands how the money system is
now working and why it keeps working. It appears
to be a little like what some internet experts
I know call the entire internet revolution:
magic. Now, put that on a t=shirt, Jake and
continue to call for reasoned debate. May I
recommend the science fiction book, That Hideous
Strength, by British writer, C.S.Lewis for an
even possible clue as to what we are headed into.

… crickets … crickets … … …

jakenewton wrote: I have found that each of WTF’s charges refer back to Higham’s book only. That book is less than a year old, and has exactly *one* customer review on Amazon. In other words, it appears to be from the fringe.

I would ask you, WTF, or anyone else the *very best reason* we should believe Higham’s allegations.

The other two references that I gave above providing explicit statements connecting GM with the ME 262 development and construction were published in 2000 and 2004, pre-dating Higham's book.

Here is another one on the History News Network:
http://hnn.us/articles/37935.html

I answered your question for references. Now please go away.

jakenewton you are evidently an inveterate scrapper. But thank you, since you have motivated other bloggers to post useful sources of information.

Now back at the ranch....

“I think you’re just wasting everyone’s time arguing a silly point.”

Whether or not war profits are a primary reason to go to war is hardly a silly point.
===
The silly point is harping on asking for proof while you "ignore" all the resources presented to you. I think people on this board have made valid and valuable arguments and put your case to rest.

Oh for crying out loud WTF, GM was busy with Opel in the *early 30s*. If that is all this is about then so what? I thought you were trying to claim something diabolical about the evil US corporation.

Well besides that he's been reviewed and published, and provided references for what he wrote (and got paid for it), damn - I guess we'll just have to wait until *Y O U R* evidence is presented to read of the real truth.

And young Albert Einstein in 1905 was seriously in-the-fringes at the patent office, thinking that he knew anything about physics - right (for someone who failed in elementary school no less)?

So how does asserting something is a fringe element change it's factual basis or quality - AS IF in fact you have some method to prove that it is on the fringe?

And I request again, exactly when is that going to be?

And BTW, when someone choses to ignore the point of relevant discussion, that is usually construed as implicit agreement (when viewed impartially). OOOoooopppssss

Your level of research, up till now, appears to be limited to superflicial google and amazon reviews - your teachers must have been as impressed as I am.

"I think you’re just wasting everyone’s time arguing a silly point."

Whether or not war profits are a primary reason to go to war is hardly a silly point.

"General Motors Company (GM) was responsible for the conversion of its Rüsselsheim affiliation into a major armament producer for the Third Reich. "

*When* exactly did this happen?

Here is yet another reference:

Working for the Enemy - Ford, General Motors and Forced Labor
in Germany During the Second World War. Reinhold Billstein, Karola Fings, Anita Kugler and Nicholas Levis. Edited and Translated by Nicholas Levis Published by Berghahn Books, New York 2000 Hardcover, 350 pages, 59 illustrations, select bibliography, index. ISBN 1-57181-224-5

Look at this reproduction of the book
here

I love Google, but in responding to jakenewton's specious arguments I am reminded that To argue with a fool makes two

jakenewton wrote: “The German GM group developed and built motors for the Messerschmidt 262 ”

Example, I can’t find a single thing supporting this claim that doesn’t reference Higham’s book. I say it’s bogus.

Can I suggest using Google?

Henry Ashby Turner, Jr. General Motors and the Nazis: The Struggle for Control of Opel, Europe's Biggest Carmaker. New Haven: Yale University Press. 2005. Pp. viii, 200. $38.00.

General Motors Company (GM) was responsible for the conversion of its Rüsselsheim affiliation into a major armament producer for the Third Reich. Opel AG became the main producer of the famous "Blitz" truck, used by the German military during World War II, and was engaged in the delivery of vital components for the JU 88, the most important small bomber of the German air force, as well as the production of the gear engine for the ME 262. Thus, after 1945 heavy accusations were directed against GM for having supported the Nazi regime and for having produced war material that was eventually used against the United States and its allies. - From the publisher of Turner's book.

I have now provided 2 independent references. An awaiting your next deflection without providing any data of your own.

Jakenewton said:

I never claimed Wall Street has no influence in politics, thanks for your effort.

Jakenewton said earlier:

Wars are *always* profitable for certain segments and companies, but that doesn’t prove that the desire for those profits cause the war
=====
Can you define the world "influence" here please? Please feel free to elaborate the "extent" of this influence i.e. in what ways do you think the Wall Street influences government policy?

PS: Our wars have gotten bigger and more expensive with time. We have a $600 billion budget this year. If there was no Iraq war how much would it be? In that case, what would the stocks of arms companies be worth if investors knew the US has no plans to go to war in the next 10 years and hence, no chance of business for these companies?

I think you're just wasting everyone's time arguing a silly point.

"Tell us when that when might be, or acknowledge your duplicity."

I have found that each of WTF's charges refer back to Higham's book only. That book is less than a year old, and has exactly *one* customer review on Amazon. In other words, it appears to be from the fringe.

I would ask you, WTF, or anyone else the *very best reason* we should believe Higham's allegations. The selective reasoning used to help confirm one's world view doesn't count as a good reason.

FOR ALL:

Here is an interesting website

http://www.corpwatch.org/article.php?list=type&type=203

"Here are some facts that I would like you to address w.r.t. to the current debate about Wall Streets influence in politics."

I never claimed Wall Street has no influence in politics, thanks for your effort.

Of how quickly you forget that I was responding to your statement of 10:08 am "That means when I begin to research them one by one I will find that the issue will be far from conclusive."

Tell us when that when might be, or acknowledge your duplicity.

BTW, did you actually ever win any debates that you formally participated in, or is your knowledge of logic and argumentation purely theoretical?

I challenge *you* to brush up on basic principles of debate, namely, in this case, the concept of Burden of Proof”. When *you* make a claim it is incumbent upon *you* to prove or support the claim, not upon me to disprove it
----

I agree. But I'm seeing a lot of "specific" postings on the subject. Now you said you're going to have to do a lot of reading and you want these good people to point our exactly where it says so - well if you're seeking the truth you're going to have to find it "yourself" from the numerous sources that are listed above. If you're looking to "argue" here to kill time then I guess its a moot point.

"The point is that so many Iraqi men, women and children have died."

That's only part of it. The numbers do matter as well. All you have to do is see how lustily the Lancet numbers are cited.

"Do you see anything wrong with the slaughter of Iraqi children?"

Of course. Loss of innocent life is always a tragedy.

Jake -

Here are some facts that I would like you to address w.r.t. to the current debate about Wall Streets influence in politics.

Global Warming: The debate started around 1988 in this country and only picked up in this decade. Nevertheless we have enough doubters who think Global Warming is a natural cycle or its a philosophy created by a pothead after losing his mind in 'Nam. It is proven now that oil companies PAID scientists to conduct research and promote findings which cast DOUBT on the subject just to provide "the other side of the story." Our country loves conflict - 1 vs 2 - who's right? who's wrong? And this tactic almost always works. So we have people like Beck inviting EXPERTS on his show who say, "There isn't much evidence on the subject to promote changes and regulate the industry!"

RESULT: Patriotism kicks in and our leaders rant on and on how our companies will be at an unfair disadvantage against foreign companies due to regulation completely ignoring that a HUGE majority of scientists around the world agree that emissions control is on the best ways to counter this problem.

Now you will ask - Please provide proof that Wall Street was involved in decision making at the White House. Following the money trail to the White House will provide you enough answers. We have enough evidence from the scientific community including James Hansen who was silenced by the White House because his findings didn't align with the official energy policy. Here is the interview on democracy now

http://www.democracynow.org/2008/3/21/censoring_science_inside_the_polit...

In spite of all this I'm sure you will still ask where is the proof!

JakeNewton: - Let’s start with these: / “1.2 million dead Iraqis” / Grossly overblown most likely.

The point is not whether the actual number is 1.2 million (it could be lower, though it is more likely to be higher) since we won't know the number until the smoke has cleared and someone can go in there to count the bodies. The point is that so many Iraqi men, women and children have died. Do you see anything wrong with the slaughter of Iraqi children? If you do, OK. If you don't, it tells us something about you that is not very nice.

RE: - The Chase Bank in Nazi-occupied Paris did millions of dollars worth of business with the enemy with the full knowledge of the head office in Manhattan.

In fairness, the US was not at war with Germany at the time when Germany began its occupation of France. Thus, Chase was not doing business with the enemy of the United States when it started its dealings with the NAZI's, though it would have been after the US joined the war. At the beginning, the US figured that it was just another one of these frequent European wars and was leaving it to the Europeans to settle it among themselves. Canada was still a colony of Great Briton at the time so they were expected to help Briton out, but the US was not. WWII did not start until Pearl Harbour for the Americans.

That said, while it may have been trading with the enemy at the beginning, Chase was still aiding and abetting war crimes - if they were aware that the NAZIs were committing them. I wonder how many people in Canada and the US believed the part about the NAZI's gas chambers and ovens - the latter seeming too much like something out of Hansel and Gretel to the uninformed to be taken seriously. It is possible that Chase remained willfully ignorant of what was going on in the Germany.

On the topic of the legality ...

Chase seems to be much like Mulroney.

The reason Mulroney says that the money was for work done outside Canada was because it would have been against the law for Mulroney to have lobbied inside Canada right after resigning as PM.

Mulroney's ex-spokesman says he didn't know about cash payments

In the letter, Schreiber said he paid Mulroney to lobby the federal government to build a light-armoured vehicle plant.

"I never hired Brian Mulroney to promote the TH495 Armoured Fighting Vehicle internationally," Schreiber wrote in the letter, dated Feb. 3, 2008.

"I hired Brian Mulroney on August 27, 1993, in Mirabel, as agreed upon on June 23, 1993, at Harrington Lake, to lobby the activities of Thyssen Bear Head Industries Inc. to establish production facilities for Thyssen Bear Head Industries Inc. at the City of Montreal East, or another place if requested by the government." ...

Mulroney has said he didn't declare the money on his taxes for six years because he spent it all on travel to places like Russia, France, and China while working for Schreiber.

But Schreiber said that's impossible because strict rules on arms exports in Canada and Germany would have made it illegal to ship to what he described as "communist" countries like China and Russia.

http://www.cbc.ca/canada/montreal/story/2008/02/07/lavoie-luc.html

"I challenge you to prove me wrong"

I challenge *you* to brush up on basic principles of debate, namely, in this case, the concept of Burden of Proof". When *you* make a claim it is incumbent upon *you* to prove or support the claim, not upon me to disprove it.

"The sword is now dangling over your head; what to do ?"

Yeah right.

"it was a great post in that it provided information and a reference"

Without the least bit of critical thinking about the "information".

"Given that this is a discussion forum on an article who’s title includes the word “Disgusting”, and not a Master’s Thesis, most people are fine with that, and appreciate it. "

And also evidently like to suspend their critical thinking skills when it comes to allegations that seem to support their world view. Are you fine with that too?

Well, at least you're clear about that "I simply question them, something that *you* should be doing as well."

For your logic and thinking that questioning the actual numbers outweigh (that I SHOULD, as morally better - like you would know ?) the implied and actual suffering.

For that -- you are now revealed and easily dismissed as callous and ill-suited to wear anything close to an association with progressive nor humanistic thinking. Perhaps for you, progressively ridiculous number analysis is enough and questioning progressives is ALL that really matters.

I suspect your disingenuous answer above was provided AS IF you really cared to read in the library more of WTF referenced facts.

I challenge you to prove me wrong, do the homework and yourself come back here with more definitive facts - or acknowledge your self serving deception ("when I research them …). I really want to see what sort of a donkey cart of logic you can make to PROVE any premise that you hold to.

The sword is now dangling over your head; what to do ?

Namaste

jake, it was a great post in that it provided information and a reference. Given that this is a discussion forum on an article who's title includes the word "Disgusting", and not a Master's Thesis, most people are fine with that, and appreciate it. I'm glad you make other posters as irritated as you make me, because I like the stuff they post in response. And sometimes, I like to take the bait too, cause I ain't here to win, and this ain't no Master's Thesis.

Jakenewton:

"Namaste, you ignored a point I made earlier. Just because certain sectors or business profit from war does not mean that they cause them. Confusion of cause and effect."
---
The relationship that you're looking for as proof exists in legal form - lobbying and campaign donations. One can make a campaign donation to help a candidate get elected and then lobby for a cause. Nobody can prove that when lawmakers push certain bills on the floor of the parliament, it is in response to those funds because then it will be called a bribe. Instead the system lets you do it legally. There have been numerous cases when elected candidates either worked for companies before joining office and pushed a bill which benefits them OR did their bidding in the government and then joined the company's board etc. Our system allows such blatant conflicts of interest so long as money doesn't exchange hands "for" services. The quid-pro-quo arrangement however EXISTS!

The people who support militarization (eg PNAC) are also the ones with links to corporate executives of companies which supply these arms. Now if you don't mind playing naive to these facts then its up to you but others can't help but put 2 and 2 together.

Besides people on this discussion board have provided enough examples to prove that the Wall Street cares about is profits no matter who the person is that they're dealing with. If the US hadn't put regulations on trading with Iran, they would be getting US technology too. Too much is being said about anti-semitism, supporting terrorists, etc these days. The Wall Street didn't care when it supplied arms, funding, etc to the Nazis. Didn't Hitler write his Mein Kampf before he came to power? They knew fully well what his intentions were and saw profit in it so they continued their business. You repeat the same point despite of numerous posts by others answering your queries.

"A fanatic is one who can't change his mind and won't change the subject"--Winston Churchill

"WTF — Thank you for taking the time to blast the numbers"

Namaste, he did no such thing, he was shilling a book.

"The German GM group developed and built motors for the Messerschmidt 262 "

Example, I can't find a single thing supporting this claim that doesn't reference Higham's book. I say it's bogus.

"WTF, great post!"

If you think shilling for a book is "great".

WTF -- Thank you for taking the time to blast the numbers, as if there were ever any real issue about how greedy and complicit the US banks (+Prescott Bush) and Walleyed St. and immoral profiteers were.

And then there's the recent complicit activities of ENRON ($70 bln ripped from CA) which was "monitored" (and forgiven) by Merril lynch PIERCE fenner smith (humongous conflict of interest with Prez Mom being a PIERCE, by birth) and the "loss" of all of the damning SEC/WTC's records during 911.

Namaste

"How is that even one murdered in an illegal occupation is OK with your pristine reasoning and logic?"

I never said that. You are losing your focus.

"You squabble about the numbers"

Not really, I simply question them, something that *you* should be doing as well.

"Do you ever read back into your brain what you write, and attempt to think what an Iraqi mother with ten close relatives dead might think? "

Your Appeal to Emotion for any specific personal tragedy is a Fallacy of Logic and always a loser. Dismissed.

WTF, great post! I'm not sure jake will be convinced. Nonetheless, I'm pleased that you have provided such a specific set of specifics for everybody. Great stuff!

WTF, you didn't provide a single reference other than Higham's book. That means when I begin to research them one by one I will find that the issue will be far from conclusive.

jakenewton's response is "Grossly overblown most likely"

How is that even one murdered in an illegal occupation is OK with your pristine reasoning and logic?

You squabble about the numbers, while tens of millions suffer. If you considered it as a ratio within your perceptual cocoon, from 1-5 % of the population is dead, and those who are left can barely hold onto sanity, while 10% are likely refugees and 70% no longer at home.

Think about all the people you know, and all those connected, and let those ratios sink into your thinking for a moment. In the USA, 1-5% dead would be tens of millions - and I would hope cause you a bit more concern than your trivial dismissal above.

Do you ever read back into your brain what you write, and attempt to think what an Iraqi mother with ten close relatives dead might think? Obliviously not.

Namaste

jakenewton wrote: Best example of a US company that sold armaments to Germany?

The German GM group developed and built motors for the Messerschmidt 262 (GM went unpunished after the war; in fact, they were awarded a $33 million tax exemption on profits for its destroyed factories in Germany and Austria by the US government).

SKF (Swedish Enskilda Bank) was the colossal ball-bearings trust. Goering's cousin, Hugo von Rosen, and William Batt, Vice Chair of the US War Production Board, were directors of SKF in America throughout the war. Ball-bearings were essential -- tanks, trucks, planes, armored cars, U-boats, railroads, ITT's communication devices, guns, and bombsights would have been powerless without them. SKF not only controlled ball-bearings but, since its inception in 1907, it controlled iron ore mines, steel and blast furnaces, foundries, factories and plants in US, Germany, France, and Britain. The largest share of its production was allocated to Germany: 60 per cent.

In 1942 Standard Oil of New Jersey shipped fuel to Germany through neutral Switzerland.

The Chase Bank in Nazi-occupied Paris did millions of dollars worth of business with the enemy with the full knowledge of the head office in Manhattan.

Ford trucks were built for the German occupation troops in France.

American telephone conglomerate ITT improved Hitler's communications Systems and designed the V1 robot bombs that devastated London. ITT also built Focke-Wulf 170s.

Want more? See "Trading with the Enemy", Charles Higham, Delacourte Press, NY USA.

simonhhh - cannuckchuck was being sarcastic and just pointing out the number of soldier deaths - though it is good to be reminded how many innocent Iraqi men women and children are also being slaughtered in the name of profit.

The argument about whether German used German companies or American companies - though the corporate candidate, I am sure that there were neeches (sp?) that the local corporations could not fill. Also, there may have been some co-operation among German and American corporations in certain areas.

German corporations, as much as they still existed after WWI did play a role in bring Hitler to power.

RE: - This is what we get when military contractors own media outlets (GE, NBC, etc).

What about PBS? What about the foreign press that you rely on to tell you what the American press doesn't? How much of that is owned or funded (via commercials/donations) by military contractors?

RE: - Wars are *always* profitable for certain segments and companies, but that doesn’t prove that the desire for those profits cause the war.

This is the old correlation does not necessarily mean correlation argument because there could always be a third factor linked to both. One can want a war and profit from said war without acting in a way to cause such a war.

In the case of Cheney, who is on record for both wanting the war enough to alter information and profiting from the war, the two are correlated, though.

RE: - The Masters of War on corporate welfare.

It was David Lewis (Naomi Klein's grandfather-in-law) who coined the phrase "corporate welfare bums." One thing that makes it likely that those who most profited from the Iraq war acted to bring it about is all the no bit contracts. Do you remember reading the following from December 15, 2003:

No blood, no booty

All those poor nations that were strong-armed into joining Washington's “coalition of the willing” finally got their reward last week — their companies will be permitted to bid on $18 billion worth of Pentagon contracts for reconstructing Iraq. ...

Meanwhile, countries in the coalition of the unwilling — including Canada — are barred from the Pentagon contracts, illustrating again that the Bush administration seems to regard Iraq as a treasure chest of spoils, to be doled out only to those who have helped in the heist.

http://www.rabble.ca/columnists_full.shtml?sh_itm=bbb86817b2802d87e422b7...

RE: - wish I could get my “evidence” on a t-shirt but only “Hail Hitler” seems to haveaccomplished that goal.

"Heil" is a greating wishing a person a long life - which is why the t-shirt doesn't say "Heil Bush." Didn't Milton Friedman do more damage than even Bush! Prefer "Bleach is evil" myself.

The Mennonites, who have been speaking out against the war in Iraq from the start are also German.

"Not all may agree with your inputs, that is for certain. But it is telling to see how the unconsciously witless gather to toss back juvenile names and weak epithets, not recognizing for a single moment that you are attempting to engage in debate and discourse which is designed to promote a balanced & thoughtful examination of military expenditures."

Thank you.

"Let us not forget the name of this site..”Common DREAMS”..NOT Common DEBATE."

Does this mean that bad ideas and lack of reasoning should go unchallenged? That's not "ideas" that ought to have any worth.

"What is your point?"

There is nothing "progressive" about offering or repeating bad ideas and arguments based on faulty reasoning. That is all.

Let's start with these:

"1.2 million dead Iraqis"

Grossly overblown most likely. You are either ignorant or disengenuous to except the Lancet numbers without question. Likely a goulish example of wishful thinking on your part to repeat the figure without question.

"11,000 uncounted and Pentagon cover-ups dead US soldiers"

Oh come on. What dark moist place did you pull this from?

"7 Trillion deficit spending"

Yet another example of listing a big number without proper context ( you are supposed to compare it to GDP).

"7% Real Inflation"

Source?

“Jakey Boy”

Classy. Call me any name you want, I will be much more interested in your posts when you are ready to support them with facts and reasoning.

What war?
Wars....occupations..... all the same to arms manufacturers. Hey, it's what we do fools! Yeah there are humanitarian things we could do instead and make lots of money but we're so good at making war. Long history of it.

jakenewton, pdf, What is your point? That you are great debators? Obviously you are. I am not , so you would win in a debate with me. However it would not change my mind nor I yours. pdf, why not a reasoned approach to foreign policy instead of 'shoot first, ask questions later'? Did I miss something in Iraq? Is safety and security only possible with military might? I don't have any access to facts and figures to figure out just who does what in implementing a military campaign such as we are in. I do see a connection between the neoconservative manifesto of the American Enterprise Institute and the the Bush administration. I see a vice president totally dismiss the wishes of 75% of the American people who disagree with the AEI. I remember when we had actual investigative reporters who would have made at least some kind of noise throughout the last 7 years. Why don't we hear any of them now, at least an 'I looked but didn't find anything'. There is something rotten in this country, we need a wake up call, not a debate.

Let us not forget the name of this site.."Common DREAMS"..NOT Common DEBATE.
We are here to SHARE each others opinions,not to disect and refute them.

jakenewton ~

Not all may agree with your inputs, that is for certain. But it is telling to see how the unconsciously witless gather to toss back juvenile names and weak epithets, not recognizing for a single moment that you are attempting to engage in debate and discourse which is designed to promote a balanced & thoughtful examination of military expenditures.

Rest assured, not all react so sophomorically.

Some recognize, like I do, that the "guns vs. butter" debate has existed as long as either resource, and it is a zero sum debate. You must have butter (food, water, shelter) to survive. You must have safety and security (military & defense) to survive. Neither can be done away with personally, or legislated away nationally, if we are to survive in the long term.

With regard to the name-callers here, it's best to consider the source and shrug them off. They have little to offer in the discussion, and wouldn't recognize a real debate if it jumped up and bit them on the rhetorical posterior. Note: They are easily identified by their liberal use of phrases such as "neo-con", "tool" and "Rovian" instead of actual thought and substantial intellectual debate.

The US military is deployed usually to defend some corporate interest.
The US government is controlled by a ruling/corporate elite.
Resources are wasted by war that are sorely needed in other places.
Can it be proved? I am sure. Can I prove it? Probobly not.
I just want it to stop, I demand an end to it!!!!!!!!!!!

Americans have a historical example as a response to internal cabals that set themselves apart from our (un)duly elected government, or even those we see as traitorous to our Constitution and interests - John Brown, an extreme but effective expression of taking power back into the hands of the people. He made some bad mistakes that could be improved on, but he knew what it took to face evil. So did US soldiers in WWII.

Anyone that thinks that words are going to stop arms companies is a dreamer and lazy. Maybe the voters will get luckier this time, but somehow I doubt it. Democracy takes respect from the government as well as the governed. When the government ignores the laws that give it legitimacy, the people are cut free to ignore those laws, and obliged to act.

The thing that amazes me is that if a Democrat did any of this, the Republicans would be howling fowl like mad. Now that their people are doing this it is all in the name of patriotism. Remember how the Republicans ranted about the deficits, the ones that Reagan and H.W. Bush racked up were fine, but Clinton...OMG. Then Bill balanced the budget and ran a surplus and they wondered how they could give the surplus to the rich. Now that G.W. Bush has added three trillion dollars to the debt, you do not hear a peep out of them.

It is not just important to know that they are doing it, but how they do it - how they set things up between government and arms dealers which make these deals harder to fight until it is too late:

In a preliminary report in January, Johnston suggested a relatively narrow investigation of the business dealings between former prime minister Brian Mulroney and arms dealer Karlheinz Schreiber.

Mulroney has admitted taking $225,000 from Schreiber to lobby international leaders on behalf of a project to build German-designed light armoured vehicles in Canada for export.

Schreiber says the total was $300,000 and Mulroney was supposed to lobby the Canadian government after leaving office -- a move that could have put him in violation of federal ethics rules.

The Liberals and NDP have been arguing for a wider mandate that would cover an earlier deal in which Air Canada bought European-made Airbus jets while Mulroney was still in power.

http://patmartin.ndp.ca/page/245

So they arranged, including some offshore money--they were trying to get Conservative governments elected worldwide--to overturn the leadership of Joe Clark. They found what they believed to be a bright, young, perfectly bilingual gentleman with business experience, with charisma, with a certain panache, and they saw him as the vehicle to getting power in Canada. He was somebody who could align all who were on the right political side of the country and bring some people from the centre.

They were successful. They overturned Joe Clark's leadership. They got Brian Mulroney elected as leader of the Conservative Party. They immediately decided how they were going to set things up. What would be the structure? How would one do business with the Government of Canada in the upcoming Mulroney era? ...

Mr. Wolf was another operative, as well as Mr. Schreiber, and it became their job to get Airbus into Canada. They had built the political contacts. They negotiated a deal, an arrangement, as to how they would be getting paid. From Airbus they would be getting $20 million. They decided how to work it.

I remember a quote by Mr. Schreiber suggesting that Strauss had said that he was either “an idiot or a genius”, because what he devised was that they would go through a smaller company and get Airbus on the ground and flying. It would be so efficient, so much better on fuel and operating costs, that once they got some on the ground in North America, all the other airlines would have to buy it. ...

The idea was that Germany would then be able to export into countries, which the German constitution and the law did not permit, through Canada or other countries, manufactured in Canada to an open market. ...

One of the guys who was involved from the very beginning, brought in because he could bring German money into the leadership, was Karlheinz Schreiber. Karlheinz had been in the country for quite some time and even had Canadian citizenship. He was well established in the Bavarian region in Germany. He was known to Franz Josef Strauss, minister-president of Bavaria. He was well connected with Thyssen Industries, Airbus and MBB. He was well connected with all the industrial companies of that area.

http://www2.parl.gc.ca/HousePublications/Publication.aspx?Language=E&Mod...

canuckchuck
1.2 million dead Iraqis
4.5 million internal and external refugees
number of wounded iraqis incalculable

4000 dead US soldiers
11,000 uncounted and Pentagon cover-ups dead US soldiers
60,000 seriously wounded
300,000 US soldier PTSD cases

3 Trillion accrued debt to 2018
7 Trillion deficit spending
15% unpublished M3 expansion monitizing debt
Untold cost to US image, reputation and good-will abroard
1 US dollar = 1.55 Euros [ie into the toilet]
7% Real Inflation
US infrasture, Health System, major utilities in RUINS
etc....etc....etc....etc....etc....etc....etc....etc....etc....etc....

"...WOW Armamant stocks tripled..."

WHAT A DREADFUL INCALCULABLE COST....

As for you "Jakey Boy" and your pesticide spreading logic, I still don't know why you bother with your mendacities...getting bored over at Murdock's FOX???

Wow, Armamant stocks tripled, and it only cost 2.2 US soldiers lives each day for the last 1825 days..what a bargain!