53407662.

doc Page 1 of 14

March 16, 2008

CIA Holocaust Claims Twenty Million

Victims
By Len Hart

The world's number one terrorist organization, the CIA has committed heinous acts of
terrorism abroad, murdering critics of US foreign and domestic policies and has done it
on behalf of an increasing tiny, privileged American elite. This elite is a tiny one
percent which owns more than the combined wealth the remaining 95% [See: the L-
Curve]. On behalf of this tiny, privileged base, the CIA has placed itself above all law
and supervision. The CIA's war on the world has claimed an estimated 12 million to 20
million victims, far more than the best estimates attributed to Adolph Hitler's
'Holocaust' of World War II.
A war of plunder waged by the CIA on much of the world has been called the Third
World War because many of its victims are chauvinistically, imperialistically, termed
"third world". Given the magnitude of these CIA atrocities, we may, indeed, consider
this panoply of terrorist acts a world war waged by privilege upon those who are less
privileged, a war waged by the rich on the poor, a war of aggression by those who have
against those who are without.
The official history of the CIA is dull reading. But one would not expect an official
document of the US government to reveal the early connections between the CIA and
Yale's notorious Skull and Bones society; one would not expect the US government to
reveal the nature of CIA backed coups in Chile to its role in the notorious Bay of Pigs
debacle. One would not expect an official document to detail the role played by the CIA
in the Iran/Contra affair. One would not expect a sanitized government version of the
CIA to reveal how the CIA creates and support death squads that have resulted in a
holocaust not seen since the Third Reich.
The passage of the National Security Act in July 1947 legislated the
changes in the Executive branch that had been under discussion since
1945. The Act established an independent Air Force, provided for
coordination by a committee of service chiefs, the Joint Chiefs of Staff
(JCS), and a Secretary of Defense, and created the National Security
Council (NSC). The CIG became an independent department and was
renamed the Central Intelligence Agency.
Under the Act, the CIA's mission was only loosely defined, since efforts to
thrash out the CIA's duties in specific terms would have contributed to
the tension surrounding the unification of the services. The four general
tasks assigned to the Agency were to advise the NSC on matters related
to national security; to make recommendations to the NSC regarding the
coordination of intelligence activities of the Departments; to correlate
and evaluate intelligence and provide for its appropriate dissemination
53407662.doc Page 2 of 14

and "to perform such other functions ... as the NSC will from time to time
direct...."
--CIA Organizational Development, [Adapted from: United States Senate
Select Committee on Governmental Operations with Respect to
Intelligence Activities, Foreign and Military Intelligence -- Book I, 94th
Congress, 2nd Session, 26 April 1976, pages 102-118.]
The numbers don't lie! At the end of a detailed statistical study, the CIA will be found,
like a spider in its web, at the bump on a bell curve, at the very nexus of murder,
mayhem and heinous acts of terrorism that it has exported across the globe and
behind the deaths of US citizens in America.
CIA atrocities may be categorized.
• Secret Wars
• Assassinations
• Subversions of targeted regimes
• Overt terrorism
• Support of other terrorist organizations
• Exploitation and/or creation of terrorist organizations like 'al Qaeda'.
• Drug sales, primarily cocaine and its derivative --crack.
• Domestic Assassinations and acts of terrorism
The US government, especially under the GOP regimes of Ronald Reagan, Bush Sr, and
now the shrub, have given up the dream of peace. The result is an Orwellian
nightmare, a state of perpetual war put into effect by the CIA, the Praetorian Guard to
America's privileged elite. The nightmares --domestic and foreign --are of our own
making. Worse than "mutually assured destruction", this thug government within a
government may very well spell the end of humankind, at least the end of those
dreams that make life worth living. It was an avoidable choice forced upon us by
incompetent, cowardly and corrupt right wing inspired 'leadership'.
CIA Mission: Prop Up Right Wing Extremists and Elites; Suppress Everyone
Else
Since World War II, the peace achieved with this strategy has been illusory. "Peace"
has become an Orwellian term for a series of crimes against humanity. The secret wars
waged by the CIA hardly penetrates the American consciousness, numbed as we are by
a compromised mainstream media. Largely owned by the likes of Rupert Murdoch and
other extreme right wing corporations, media, at the highest levels of ownership and
management, are complicit. Many conflicts escape the glare of publicity --by design or
by incompetence. Some are low-intensity conflicts designed to slip under the radar.
At the very heart of the CIA modus operandi is the network of proxy governments, by
nature, oligarchical, naturally allied with America's privileged classes. The CIA has little
trouble convincing this class that its work abroad is 'patriotic'.
The CIA has naturally allied itself with ruling oligarchs abroad, most notably the Saudi
Royals. It was significant that the Saudi royals were provided a 'royal' exit from the US
when every other aircraft was grounded on 911.
Throughout the Middle East and the Persian Gulf, wealth and income disparities are
even greater than those in the US. The oil emirates, only some 0.5 percent of the
population, are billionaires. Everyone else, like the poorer and middle income folk in
America, share less or none of the wealth that is generated by the production of oil. In
Latin America, Cesar Chavez may be a notable exception, hence the Bush
administration's campaign of demonization. Chavez dares to maintain control of his
nation's oil wealth.
53407662.doc Page 3 of 14

In Latin America, Central America, this same system is working. If the

people don't like it, you organize the police into death squads, as we've
done in many countries, including, conspicuously, El Salvador, and you
kill enough of them that they are emasculated. They can't do anything
about it. They are crippled. They are repressed, suppressed and
oppressed, and you can get by with this system of milking the countries
to your will and to your way.
The [Sen. Frank] Church Committee of 1975 ..... Again this is not a
lecture about the Secret Wars of the CIA. That's a separate lecture. I
could give it again, but it takes a full hour in its own right. But you must
know how the CIA weaves into this war complex - this war machinery of
ours.
--John Stockwell, The CIA and the Gulf War
According to Stockwell, the Church Committee of 1975 discovered over thirteen
thousand covert operations since World War II.
Late in 1974, investigative reporter Seymour Hersh revealed that the CIA
was not only destabilizing foreign governments, but was also conducting
illegal intelligence operations against thousands of American citizens.
On January 27, 1975, an aroused Senate voted overwhelmingly to
establish a special 11-member investigating body along the lines of the
recently concluded Watergate Committee. Under the chairmanship of
Idaho Senator Frank Church, with Texas Senator John Tower as vice-
chairman, the select committee was given nine months and 150 staffers
to complete its work.
The so-called Church Committee ran into immediate resistance from the
Ford administration, concerned about exposing American intelligence
operations and suspicious of Church's budding presidential ambitions.
The committee interviewed 800 individuals, and conducted 250
executive and 21 public hearings. At the first televised hearing, staged in
the Senate Caucus Room, Chairman Church dramatically displayed a CIA
poison dart gun to highlight the committee's discovery that the CIA
directly violated a presidential order by maintaining stocks of shellfish
toxin sufficient to kill thousands.
Church Committee Created
Stockwell maintains that many of these 'covert operations' were violent and led to
wars. Examples include the propaganda campaign that led directly to the Korean and
Viet Nam wars.
...we have so many of them in the public record that it's obviously very
difficult to know exactly how many people died in Vietnam or in Korea or
in Nicaragua or in the Congo - but still, working with conservative figures
we come up with a minimum figure of SIX MILLION PEOPLE killed in the
Secret Wars of the CIA through its de-stabilizations over these past forty
years:
One million people killed in the Korean War;
Two million people killed in Vietnam;
One to two million people killed in Cambodia;
Eight hundred thousand people killed in Indonesia;
Fifty thousand people killed in Angola.
53407662.doc Page 4 of 14

Now that began with the war that I organized as Commander of the
Angola Task Force, working for a subcommittee of the National Security
Council in Washington in 1975 and 1976. Fifty thousand is the number
that the Sandinistas and The New York Times pretty much agreed on
were killed and wounded in Nicaragua in the ONE BILLION DOLLAR
Contra de-stabilization in that country that we effected in the 1980s.
--John Stockwell, The CIA and the Gulf War
Stockwell concludes that throughout what is called the 'Cold War' some twenty million
people were murdered, '...the second or third bloodiest war in all of human history".
Stockwell calls this the Third World War, a war waged by the CIA upon a 'third world'. Is
there any question now about why the US is hated throughout the world? Any
questions?
Torture and death squads we do not run in England or Canada or
Belgium or Sweden or Switzerland. They are, virtually all of them, done
against countries of the Third World where the governments of those
countries are not strong enough to prohibit us, to prevent us from
brutalizing their people. The six million people killed are people of the
Third World: people of the Mitumba Mountains of the Congo, and the
jungles of Southeast Asia, and the hills of Nicaragua. And now, of course,
the Middle Eastern deserts, in a new wrinkle on this system.
--John Stockwell, The CIA and the Gulf War
By now, the CIA has become expert in waging wars by proxy, encouraging domestic
terrorism, subverting elected governments.
CIA operations follow the same recurring script. First, American business
interests abroad are threatened by a popular or democratically elected
leader. The people support their leader because he intends to conduct
land reform, strengthen unions, redistribute wealth, nationalize foreign-
owned industry, and regulate business to protect workers, consumers
and the environment. So, on behalf of American business, and often with
their help, the CIA mobilizes the opposition. First it identifies right-wing
groups within the country (usually the military), and offers them a deal:
"We'll put you in power if you maintain a favorable business climate for
us." The Agency then hires, trains and works with them to overthrow the
existing government (usually a democracy).
--Steve Kangas, A Timeline of CIA Atrocities
Pakistan is a case in point.
Since 9/11, the Bush administration has been propping up Musharraf's
military regime with $3.6 billion in economic aid from the US and a US-
sponsored consortium, not to mention $900 million in military aid and
the postponement of overdue debt repayments totaling $13.5 billion. But
now the administration is debating whether Musharraf has become too
dependent on Islamic extremist political parties in Pakistan to further US
interests, and whether he should be pressured to permit the return of
two exiled former prime ministers, Benazir Bhutto and Nawaz Sharif, who
have formed an electoral alliance to challenge him in presidential
elections scheduled for next year.
--Pakistan: Friend or Foe? The US shouldn't prop up President
Musharraf's military regime, Selig S. Harrison
The late Benazir Bhutto revealed the truth before she was brutally gunned down in the
streets of Karachi: US policy causes world terrorism. She died before she could tell the
rest of the story. See also: Terrorism is worse under GOP regimes.
53407662.doc Page 5 of 14

When the United States aligns with dictatorships and totalitarian

regimes, it compromises the basic democratic principles of its foundation
-- namely, life, liberty and justice for all. Dictatorships such as
Musharraf's suppress individual rights and freedoms and empower the
most extreme elements of society. Oppressed citizens, unable to
represent themselves through other means, often turn to extremism and
religious fundamentalism.
Benazir Bhutto, A False Choice for Pakistan
Quoted above was a paragraph from A Timeline of CIA Atrocities by Steve Kangas,
whose death under questionable circumstances raises still more questions given his
encyclopedic knowledge of the CIA and the antipathy he inspired from Richard Mellon
Scaife --the spider at the center of a malicious, right wing web, perhaps the "great right
wing conspiracy" referred to by Hilary Clinton at the height of the GOP blow job jihad
and scandal.
In 1984 Kangas moved to Germany where he was involved in electronic
eavesdropping on Soviet military units in Eastern Europe, analyzing the
transcripts and reporting back to NATO. It was at this time he began to
question his conservative political beliefs.
Kangas left military intelligence in 1986 and became a student at the
University of California in Santa Cruz. This experience moved him further
to the left: "There, kindly professors pointed out to me the illogic of
defending life by taking it, destroying the planet for a buck and shutting
down schools to build more prisons. I am now thoroughly brainwashed to
believe that kindness and human decency are positive traits to be
emulated and encouraged."
Kangas ran the Liberalism Resurgent website. This included several
articles on the activities of the Central Intelligence Agency. One of his
online essays, The Origins of the Overclass, attempted to show "why the
richest 1 percent have exploded ahead since 1975, with the help of the
New Right, Corporate America and, surprisingly, the CIA." In the essay he
argues that Richard Mellon Scaife ran "Forum World Features, a foreign
news service used as a front to disseminate CIA propaganda around the
world."
Scaife was very unhappy with the attack made on him and employed
private detective, Rex Armistead, to carry out an investigation into
Kangas.
It is believed that Kangas was working on a book about CIA covert
activities when on 8th February, 1999, he was found dead in the
bathroom of the offices of Richard Mellon Scaife, the owner of the
Pittsburgh Tribune. He had been shot in the head. Officially he had
committed suicide but some people believe he was murdered. In an
article in Salon Magazine, (19th March, 1999) Andrew Leonard asked:
"Why did the police report say the gun wound was to the left of his head,
while the autopsy reported a wound on the roof of his mouth? Why had
the hard drive on his computer been erased shortly after his death? Why
had Scaife assigned his No. 1 private detective, Rex Armistead, to look
into Kangas' past?"
--Spartacus International; See also: A Timeline of CIA Atrocities
Violence against against America, often called 'blowback', is an inevitable reaction to
CIA atrocities and interference. Concurrently, the US leads the world in the production
of military hardware --tanks, missiles, nuclear weaponry, weapons of mass destruction.
More recently, since the regime of Ronald Reagan specifically, the US has begun to
53407662.doc Page 6 of 14

trail the world in many other key industrial classification. Under GOP 'stewardship', the
US is rapidly becoming a third world nation on steroids. As long as this is the case, no
one living in the US, no citizen of the US abroad, is truly free. We are all reduced to
mere units in a bigger, evil machine. Bush and his servile ilk serve Moloch willingly and
visibly at Bohemian Grove. Slavery, however, is forced upon the rest of us, a process
assisted ably by a corporate media.
Secrets of the CIA, Parts 1 - 7
The most extreme example of this, of course, is Fox News, best described as political
porn. If the Fox outfit did not deflect attention from more insidious designs, it would be
laughable, even indulge for the low-class, beer drinking' entertainment that it might
bring to certain demographics. In practice, however, it might as well be a state run
organization reduced to merely dramatizing officially sanctioned news.
Should you have doubts about press complicity with CIA/government lawlessness, I
urge you to consider, as an example, revelations from Dan Rather about what CBS did
to curry favor with the White House; or what can happen to a corporate, fully
politicized, fourth estate: the Iraq war. Once called Yellow Journalism, it is now cleverly
called "fair and balanced". In the worst cases, journalism become little more than a CIA
'front'.
After World War II, these psywar techniques continued. C.D. Jackson, a
major figure in US psywar efforts before and after the war, was
simultaneously a top executive at Time-Life. Psywar was also used with
success during the 1950s by Edward Lansdale, first in the Philippines and
then in South Vietnam. In Guatemala, the Dulles brothers worked with
their friends at United Fruit, in particular the "father of public relations,"
Edward Bernays, who for years had been lobbying the press on behalf of
United. When CIA puppets finally took over in 1954, only applause was
heard from the media, commencing forty years of CIA-approved horrors
in that unlucky country.[2] Bernays' achievement apparently impressed
Allen Dulles, who immediately began using US public relations experts
and front groups to promote the image of Ngo Dinh Diem as South
Vietnam's savior.[3]
The combined forces of unaccountable covert operations and corporate
public relations, each able to tap massive resources, are sufficient to
make the concept of "democracy" obsolete. Fortunately for the rest of
us, unchallenged power can lose perspective. With research and analysis
-- the capacity to see and understand the world around them --
entrenched power must constantly anticipate and contain potential
threats. But even as power seems more secure, this capacity can be
blinded by hubris and isolation.
--Daniel Brandt, NameBase NewsLine, Journalism And The CIA
So it naturally follows that the robber barons and their fourth estate business partners
should indeed benefit from the puppet they all worked so vigorously to enthrone.
Corporate Interests merged with State Interests
The corporate interests of America are now almost entirely at one with
the political interests of America. The people are either relegated to the
outskirts as unimportant bystanders or are caught in the cross-fire as
casualties of a hostile corporate takeover by American and even foreign
corporations. We "the people" do not matter in a country where
corporate profits are tied to state policy, which then uses those same
corporations to tell us what is real and what is fabricated, what is true
and what is false.
53407662.doc Page 7 of 14

--Laura Alexandrovna, Our Cold Civil War

The CIA is symptomatic of a militarized society, in which the CIA and the military play
important roles in a circular self-justification. Much is made of the fact that the military
provides opportunities for high school dropouts, the disadvantaged who might not
otherwise get an education or a job. What is to be said of a society for which the export
of death and destruction becomes essential to its economic well-being?
As Gore Vidal argued persuavesively in his "The Decline and Fall of the American
Empire", the military/industrial complex is a drag on the economy. The Pentagon
budget, he argues, is an economic black hole. He sites, as an example, the
construction of a 'tank'! Once built, the economic life of the tank if finished! From that
point on, the tank becomes a net drag on the economy. It produces nothing, adds
noting! Moreover, the Pentagon soaks up monies that might have been budgeted for
truly productive programs like education and training. What is to be said about a
society that finds it necessary to send young people off to die in immoral wars in order
to get them employed and off the streets?
Eisenhower saw Big Brother's approach but could not have known how it might have
been avoided. The revolution, decades in the making, is like a slow boil. We did not
even know when we were "done", but cooked we are! We are like one of many puzzles
that originated in the mind of the ancient Megarian logician, Eubulides of Miletus.
The puzzle is called "sorites", from
the Greek for "heap." The question is
whether or not a single grain of sand
is a "heap"? The answer is obviously
"no". But, if we add grains one at a
time, the question arises: at what
point have we made a "heap"? At
what point have we made of the
Military/Industrial complex a
Frankenstein monster, Moloch, a Big
Brother? At what point have we
sacrificed our souls to ol' Scratch? At
what point did MIC become the Owl
god?How CIA Became 'Praetorian
Guard' to America's Fascist Right
Wing
While Americans in general opposed involvement in foreign wars, American
industrialists were not inclined to turn down a quick buck.
On December 20, 1922 the New York Times reported that automobile
manufacturer Henry Ford was financing Adolph Hitler's nationalist and
anti-Semitic movements in Munich. Simultaneously, the Berlin
newspaper Berliner Tageblatt appealed to the American Ambassador in
Berlin to investigate and halt Henry Ford's intervention into German
domestic affairs. It was reported that Hitler's foreign backers had
furnished a "spacious headquarters" with a "host of highly paid
lieutenants and officials." Henry Ford's portrait was prominently
displayed on the walls of Hitler's personal office:
--Henry Ford and the Nazis
Opposition to US involvement in World War II is most often linked to Charles Lindbergh.
However, most AFC supporters were neither liberal, nor Socialist. Many
simply wanted to stay out of the war. Since many also came from the
Midwest, an area never as sensitive to European problems as the east
53407662.doc Page 8 of 14

coast, isolationist arguments was soon buttressed by more traditional

prejudices against eastern industrial and banking interests. (Almost two-
thirds of the Committee's 850,000 registered supporters would
eventually come from the Midwest, mostly from a radius of three
hundred miles around Chicago.)[13] Many AFC supporters were certain
industry and the banks wanted war for their own profit.[14] Many other
supporters were Republicans who flocked to the AFC for partisan political
reasons. Still others were covertly pro-German. Some were German-
Americans whose sentimental attachments had not been diminished by
the crimes of the Nazi regime. Others, whether of German origin or not,
were attracted to Hitler's racism and anti-Semitism.
--David Gordon, America First:the Anti-War Movement, Charles Lindbergh
and the Second World War, 1940-1941, History Department, Bronx
Community College / CUNY Graduate Center
Ideologically, Bush and Lindbergh have much in common. It is no stretch to imagine
this faction welcoming a Hitler victory in Europe, perhaps plotting a Nazi coup d'etat in
the US had that happened.
Lindbergh wanted Hitler to destroy the Soviet Union, and was willing to
accept Nazi domination of Europe as the price.[118] His protests to the
contrary are not convincing.[119] Long before most Committee
members, he had come to believe the existence of the Soviet Union had
made Hitler's dictatorship necessary. The German invasion of Russia in
June 1941 made the need to keep America out of the war greater than
ever. As a result, the efforts of America Firsters to keep America neutral
became more frenetic as German successes in Russia mounted, and
Roosevelt's efforts to enter the war increased.
--David Gordon, America First:the Anti-War Movement, Charles Lindbergh
and the Second World War, 1940-1941, History Department, Bronx
Community College / CUNY Graduate Center
Lindbergh opposed US entry into WWII for the same reasons the Bush family continued
to do business with Hitler and the Nazis' after war had begun. The Bush family were
Hitler's trading partners.
The debate over Prescott Bush's behavior has been bubbling under the
surface for some time. There has been a steady internet chatter about
the "Bush/Nazi" connection, much of it inaccurate and unfair. But the
new documents, many of which were only declassified last year, show
that even after America had entered the war and when there was
already significant information about the Nazis' plans and
policies, he worked for and profited from companies closely
involved with the very German businesses that financed Hitler's
rise to power. It has also been suggested that the money he made
from these dealings helped to establish the Bush family fortune and set
up its political dynasty.
...
Three sets of archives spell out Prescott Bush's involvement. All three
are readily available, thanks to the efficient US archive system and a
helpful and dedicated staff at both the Library of Congress in Washington
and the National Archives at the University of Maryland.
The first set of files, the Harriman papers in the Library of Congress,
show that Prescott Bush was a director and shareholder of a number of
companies involved with Thyssen.
53407662.doc Page 9 of 14

The second set of papers, which are now in the National Archives, are
contained in vesting order number 248 which records the seizure of the
company assets. What these files show is that on October 20 1942 the
alien property custodian seized the assets of the UBC, of which Prescott
Bush was a director. Having gone through the books of the bank, further
seizures were made against two affiliates, the Holland-American Trading
Corporation and the Seamless Steel Equipment Corporation. By
November, the Silesian-American Company, another of Prescott Bush's
ventures, had also been seized. --
British Guardian: How Bush's grandfather helped Hitler's rise to power
By now it is common knowledge, verified in the public record, that in October of 1942,
Prescott Bush was accused of "Running Nazi front groups in the United States". He was
charged under the Trading With the Enemy Act as the US government shut down the
operations at New York's Union Banking Corporation.
Bush's actions might have been considered high treason. They are interesting by virtue
of the myriad connections about what is commonly referred to as the "Bush Crime
FAmily" --Avril Harriman, the Rockefellers, Allen Dulles, James Baker III, Gulf Oil,
Pennzoil, and Osama bin Laden. The connections are labyrinthine, involving a host of
corporate connections, high ranking Nazis, the CIA and Allen Dulles.
Certainly, opposition to the US entry into World War II was not essentially "leftist". It
was, rather, the right wing that overtly supported Hitler's adventures in Europe. Their
opposition was, in fact, an ideological opposition to the US opposition to Hitler. There is
a stunning picture of American Nazis giving the Nazi salute as they filed past the
coffins of German Nazis killed in the crash of the airship Hindenburg at Lakehurst, New
Jersey.
Some recent history may be in order. Before their resurgence amid delicious
vindication, the Dixie Chicks were vilified by the same crowd that attacked dissenters
for daring to compare Bush with Hitler. In Europe, by contrast, the similarities were
clear and irrefutable, quite beyond the power of Fox to spin or lie about.
...one woman who is a translator and teacher of German-language
literature – a woman who lived in Germany for ten years and has
immersed herself in the German culture for twenty years said that
among the people in Germany, Switzerland, and Austria, and among
Holocaust survivors in the United States, she hears the parallels between
Bush and Hitler and the similarities between the United States now and
Germany in the 1930's all the time. "She writes:"
"It's almost like this knowledge is a given--a basic assumption
shared by everyone I know who is intimately familiar with the
Nazi era (that is, 90% of my professional colleagues, clients,
collaborators, etc.). It is like the unspoken known. Unspoken, and
unspeakable"
--Lonna Gooden VanHorn, America's Hitler: Part V
The most recent right wing variation about WWII peaceniks had its origins in Bush's run
up to war against Iraq. It goes like this: the allies had already done all the hard work
because US "Peaceniks" did not want to go to war. However, it was not "leftist
peaceniks" who wanted to keep the US out of the war; it was the fascist right. It was
Charles Lindbergh and Prescott Bush, who led domestic opposition to US entry into
World War II. Prescott Bush, later charged with treason, and Charles Lindbergh, an
avowed fascist, were the most notable figures in a movement that most certainly
included Nazis, sympathizers and other admirers of Adolph Hitler
53407662.doc Page 10 of 14

Keeping the US out of WWII had been a ring wing goal when goal when Prescott Bush,
the Shrub's Grandfather, conspired to overthrow the legitimate government of the
United States and replace the administration of FDR with a fascist dictatorship.
The conspirators were operating under the umbrella of a front group
called the American Liberty League, which included many families that
are still household names today, including Heinz, Colgate, Birds Eye and
General Motors.
Butler played along with the clique to determine who was involved but
later blew the whistle and identified the ringleaders in testimony given to
the House Committee on un-American Activities.
However, the Committee refused to even question any of the individuals
named by Butler and his testimony was omitted from the record, leading
to charges that they were involved in covering the matter up, and the
majority of the media blackballed the story."
-- BBC: Bush's Grandfather Planned Fascist Coup In America
In 1936, William Dodd, the US Ambassador to Germany, wrote a letter to President
Roosevelt in which he stated:
"A clique of US industrialists is hell-bent to bring a fascist state to
supplant our democratic government and is working closely with the
fascist regime in Germany and Italy. I have had plenty of opportunity in
my post in Berlin to witness how close some of our American ruling
families are to the Nazi regime.... A prominent executive of one of the
largest corporations, told me point blank that he would be ready to take
definite action to bring fascism into America if President Roosevelt
continued his progressive policies.
Certain American industrialists had a great deal to do with bringing
fascist regimes into being in both Germany and Italy. They extended
aid to help Fascism occupy the seat of power, and they are
helping to keep it there. [ed. treason!] Propagandists for fascist
groups try to dismiss the fascist scare. We should be aware of the
symptoms. When industrialists ignore laws designed for social and
economic progress they will seek recourse to a fascist state when the
institutions of our government compel them to comply with the
provisions."
Prescott Bush's role in helping finance Hitler's Nazi War Machine is a fact, a matter of
record. Clearly, then, the elder Bush was a part of a criminal, treasonous enterprise
that sought to overthrow the elected government of the US and impose upon it a
fascist dictatorship.
The most tantalising part of the story remains shrouded in mystery: the
connection, if any, between Prescott Bush, Thyssen, Consolidated
Silesian Steel Company (CSSC) and Auschwitz.
Thyssen's partner in United Steel Works, which had coal mines and steel
plants across the region, was Friedrich Flick, another steel magnate who
also owned part of I.G. Farben, the powerful German chemical company.
Flick's plants in Poland made heavy use of slave labour from the
concentration camps in Poland. According to a New York Times article
published in March 18 1934 Flick owned two-thirds of CSSC while
"American interests" held the rest.
53407662.doc Page 11 of 14

--How Bush's grandfather helped Hitler's rise to power [See: BBC: Bush's
Grandfather Planned Fascist Coup In America] Also: Bush's Grandfather
Planned Fascist Coup In America. Certainly, this treasonous gang of right
wing insurgents, bore little resemblance to the broad-based, often leftist
coalition of peace activists who opposed US action in Viet Nam upon
broader, philosophical principles.
In 1980, Stockwell said that "if the Soviet Union were to disappear off
the face of the map, the United States would quickly seek out new
enemies to justify its own military-industrial complex."
The CIA and Iran/Contra
CIA and Iran/Contra

Addendum:
The Speech that may have motivated the murder of Sen. Paul
WellstoneIn the middle of tough re-election campaign, Sen. Paul
Wellstone announces his opposition to Bush's Iraq war resolution. His
speech to the US Senate, entitled "Regarding Military Action Against
Iraq" was presented on October 3, 2002. By October,
Mr. President, as we turn later today to address our policy on Iraq, I want
to take a few minutes to outline my views. The situation remains fluid,
and Administration officials are engaged in negotiations at the United
Nations over what approach we ought to take, with our allies, to disarm
the brutal and dictatorial Iraqi regime.
Our debate here is critical because the administration seeks our
authorization now for military action including possibly unprecedented,
pre-emptive, go-it-alone military action in Iraq, even as it seeks to garner
support from our allies on a tough new UN disarmament resolution.
Let me be clear: Saddam Hussein is a brutal, ruthless dictator who has
repressed his own people, attacked his neighbors, and remains an
international outlaw. The world would be a much better place if he were
gone and the regime in Iraq were changed. That's why the US should
unite the world against Saddam, and not allow him to unite forces
against us.
A go-it-alone approach, allowing for a ground invasion of Iraq without the
support of other countries, could give Saddam exactly that chance. A
pre-emptive go-it-alone strategy towards Iraq is wrong. I oppose it.
I support ridding Iraq of weapons of mass destruction through unfettered
UN inspections, which should begin as soon as possible. Only a broad
coalition of nations, united to disarm Saddam, while preserving our war
on terror, is likely to succeed. Our primary focus now must be on Iraq's
verifiable disarmament of weapons of mass destruction. This will help
maintain international support, and could even eventually result in
Saddam's loss of power.
Of course, I would welcome this, as would most of our allies. The
president has helped to direct intense new multilateral pressure on
Saddam Hussein to allow UN and International Atomic Energy Agency
weapons inspectors back in to Iraq to conduct their assessment of Iraq's
chemical, biological and nuclear programs. Saddam clearly has felt that
heat, and it suggests what might be accomplished through collective
action. I am not naive about this process, and much work lies ahead. But
53407662.doc Page 12 of 14

we cannot dismiss out-of-hand Saddam's late and reluctant commitment

to comply with UN disarmament arrangements, or the agreement struck
Tuesday to begin to implement it. We should use the gathering
international resolve to collectively confront his regime by building on
these efforts through a new UN disarmament resolution.
This debate must include all Americans, because our decisions finally
must have the informed consent of the American people, who will be
asked to bear the costs, in blood and treasure, of our decisions. When
the lives of the sons and daughters of average Americans could be
risked and lost, their voices must be heard by Congress before we make
decisions about military action.
Right now, despite a desire to support our president, I believe many
Americans still have profound questions about the wisdom of relying too
heavily on a pre-emptive, go-it-alone military approach.
Acting now on our own might be a sign of our power. Acting sensibly and
in a measured way in concert with our allies, with bipartisan
Congressional support, would be a sign of our strength.
It would also be a sign of the wisdom of our founders, who lodged in the
President the power to command US armed forces, and in Congress the
power to make war, ensuring a balance of powers between co-equal
branches of government. Our Constitution lodges the power to weigh the
causes for war and the ability to declare war in Congress precisely to
ensure that the American people and those who represent them will be
consulted before military action is taken.
The Senate has a grave duty to insist on a full debate that examines for
all Americans the full range of options before us, and weighs those
options, together with their risks and costs. Such a debate should be
energized by the real spirit of September 11: a debate which places a
priority not on unanimity, but on the unity of a people determined to
forcefully confront and defeat terrorism and to defend our values.
I have supported internationally sanctioned coalition military action in
Bosnia, in Kosovo and Serbia, and in Afghanistan. Even so, in recent
weeks, I and others including major Republican policymakers like former
Bush National Security Advisor Brent Scowcroft, former Bush Secretary
of State James Baker, my colleague on the Foreign Relations Committee
Senator Hagel, Bush Mideast Envoy General Anthony Zinni and other
leading US military leaders have raised serious questions about the
approach the Administration is taking on Iraq.
There have been questions raised about the nature and urgency of Iraq's
threat, our response to that threat, and against whom, exactly that
threat is directed. What is the best course of action that the US could
take to address the threat? What are the economic, political, and
national security consequences of possible US or US-British invasion of
Iraq? There have been questions raised about the consequences of our
actions abroad, including its effects on the continuing war on terrorism,
our ongoing efforts to stabilize and rebuild Afghanistan, and efforts to
calm the intensifying Middle East crisis, especially the Israeli-Palestinian
conflict. And there have been questions raised about the consequences
of our actions here at home.
Of first and greatest concern, obviously, are the questions raised about
the possible loss of life that could result from our actions. The United
53407662.doc Page 13 of 14

States could send tens of thousands of US troops to fight in Iraq, and in

so doing we could risk countless lives, of US soldiers and innocent Iraqis.
There are other questions, about the impact of an attack in relation to
our economy. The United States could face soaring oil prices and could
spend billions both on a war and on a years-long effort to stabilize Iraq
after an invasion. The resolution we will be debating today would
explicitly authorize a go-it-alone approach.
I believe an international approach is essential. In my view, our policy
should have four key elements. First and foremost, the United States
must work with our allies to deal with Iraq. We should not go it alone or
virtually alone with a pre-emptive ground invasion. Most critically, acting
alone could jeopardize our top national security priority, the continuing
war on terror. The intense cooperation of other nations in matters
related to intelligence-sharing, security, political and economic
cooperation, law enforcement and financial surveillance, and other areas
has been crucial to this fight, and enables us to wage it effectively with
our allies. Over the past year, this cooperation has been our most
successful weapon against terror networks. That -- not attacking Iraq
should be the main focus of our efforts in the war on terror.
We have succeeded in destroying some Al Qaeda forces, but many of its
operatives have scattered, their will to kill Americans still strong. The
United States has relied heavily on alliances with nearly 100 countries in
a coalition against terror for critical intelligence to protect Americans
from possible future attacks. Acting with the support of allies, including
hopefully Arab and Muslim allies, would limit possible damage to that
coalition and our anti-terrorism efforts. But as General Wes Clark, former
Supreme Commander of Allied Forces in Europe has recently noted, a
premature go-it-alone invasion of Iraq "would super-charge recruiting for
Al Qaeda."
Second, our efforts should have the goal of disarming Saddam Hussein
of all of his weapons of mass destruction. Iraq agreed to destroy its
weapons of mass destruction at the end of the Persian Gulf War and to
verification by the UN and the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA)
that this had been done. According to the UN and IAEA, and undisputed
by the administration, inspections during the 1990's neutralized a
substantial portion of Iraq's weapons of mass destruction, and getting
inspectors back in to finish the job is critical. The prompt resumption of
inspections and disarmament, under an expedited timetable and with
unfettered access in Iraq, is imperative.
Third, weapons inspections should be enforceable. If efforts by UN
weapons inspectors are tried and fail, a range of potential UN-sanctioned
means, including proportionate military force, should be considered. I
have no doubt that Congress would act swiftly to authorize force in such
circumstances. This does not mean giving the UN a veto over US actions.
No one wants to do that. It simply means, as Chairman Levin has
observed, that Saddam is a world problem and should be addressed in
the world arena.
Finally, our approach toward Iraq must be consistent with international
law and the framework of collective security developed over the last 50
years or more. It should be sanctioned by the Security Council under the
UN Charter, to which we are a party and by which we are legally bound.
Only a broad coalition of nations, united to disarm Saddam, while
53407662.doc Page 14 of 14

preserving our war on terror, can succeed. Our response will be far more
effective if Saddam sees the whole world arrayed against him.
We should act forcefully, resolutely, sensibly with our allies, and not
alone, to disarm Saddam. Authorizing the pre-emptive, go-it-alone use of
force now, right in the midst of continuing efforts to enlist the world
community to back a tough new disarmament resolution on Iraq, could
be a costly mistake for our country.
--Paul Wellstone, Speech to the US Senate regarding US military action in
Iraq, 2002
The CIA has enabled a right wing dictatorship in America, and, in doing so, has inspired
generations of 'terrorist' antagonists who might never have found cause until given it
them by the CIA's ham-fisted approach to empire. The CIA has been called a new
'Praetorian Guard', as apt a description as any I have found. Certainly, the CIA is to Big
Brother what the 'Praetorian Guard was to the Emperors of Rome. The CIA does not
merely exercise absolute power via the apparatus of the police state, it marshals the
resources of the monolithic state to rob the individual of person hood. Big Brother
literally changes what it means to be "human".
In Goethe's version of Faust, Mephistopheles tries to grab Faust's soul when he dies but
is frustrated by a divine intervention. Can the people of the US afford to wait passively
for divine intervention? No! We have the power to deny to the state its power to define
us. Challenged by aristocrats who demanded to know just who he thought he was,
Voltaire said "I have no name but the name that I have made for myself!" Big Brother's
lies have made of us our own worst nightmares, but only if we buy into the scheme. It
follows, therefore, that Big Brother is finished when we make Voltaire's existentialist
choice, when we take responsibility for what we have become, when we dare to define
ourselves. The seeds of revolution are born when each individual chooses to be free!

Additional resources
• "Five Days in London" by John Lukacs
• The transcripts of the Nuremberg Tribunal
• Churchill's History of World War II
• Liddell Hart's History of the Second World War
• Read this or George W. Bush will be president for the rest of your life
• Lessons Bush Learned from Hitler
• Bush's Fascist, Private Army of Paid Cutthroats, Murderers and Mercenaries
• Emergent Properties
• Grand Jury: "Can We Indict Bush & Cheney?"
• Why the Bush Regime is an Orwellian Threat
• Lessons Bush Learned from Hitler

Authors Website: http://existentialistcowboy.blogspot.com/

Authors Bio: Len Hart is a Houston based film/video producer specializing in shorts and
full-length documentaries. He is a former major market and network correspondent;
credits include CBS, ABC-TV and UPI. He maintains the progressive blog: The
Existentialist Cowboy