Book: The Rise of the Fourth Reich

I read a couple of pages in abookshop….and it may well be that some parts are true (IG Farben etc), the whole enchilada is kinda weird and panaoid. No sale for me.

There are better books out there that deal with the South American Nazis, the flight plans, the dealing with international politics, etc.

Too sensational imo.

I'll wait for someone who's read or reading this book to post something constructive since L Ron shit disturbing is slowly or completely derailing this thread.

Here's one that nobody will argue with (and most of the US would like to pretend didn't exist). I'm not sure about the Bush familly connection, however prior to the war there were several other high powered American famillies which had anti-semetic views or were supporters of the Nazi party. I stumbled across this back when I was in school looking up Manufacturing books.

http://www.amazon.ca/International-Jew-Henry-Ford/dp/1599869179/ref=sr_1_9?ie=UTF8[HTML_REMOVED]s=books[HTML_REMOVED]qid=1254774988[HTML_REMOVED]sr=8-9

Also there's the father of everybody's favorite mouse, although it's somewhat debatable.

(Storm pointed to another irony: that a man adored by many as a benevolent, grandfatherly figure was also demonized for the type of boss he was and had a reputation as an anti-Semite.

"That's one of the questions everybody asks me," Gabler said, " 'Was he an anti-Semite?' That's out there. My answer to that is, not in the conventional sense that we think of someone as being an anti-Semite. But he got the reputation because, in the 1940s, he got himself allied with a group called The Motion Picture Alliance for the Preservation of American Ideals, which was an anti-Communist and anti-Semitic organization. And though Walt himself, in my estimation, was not anti-Semitic, nevertheless, he willingly allied himself with people who were anti-Semitic, and that reputation stuck. He was never really able to expunge it throughout his life.")

Here's one that nobody will argue with (and most of the US would like to pretend didn't exist). I'm not sure about the Bush familly connection, however prior to the war there were several other high powered American famillies which had anti-semetic views or were supporters of the Nazi party. I stumbled across this back when I was in school looking up Manufacturing books.

http://www.amazon.ca/International-Jew-Henry-Ford/dp/1599869179/ref=sr_1_9?ie=UTF8[HTML_REMOVED]s=books[HTML_REMOVED]qid=1254774988[HTML_REMOVED]sr=8-9

Also there's the father of everybody's favorite mouse, although it's somewhat debatable.

(Storm pointed to another irony: that a man adored by many as a benevolent, grandfatherly figure was also demonized for the type of boss he was and had a reputation as an anti-Semite.

"That's one of the questions everybody asks me," Gabler said, " 'Was he an anti-Semite?' That's out there. My answer to that is, not in the conventional sense that we think of someone as being an anti-Semite. But he got the reputation because, in the 1940s, he got himself allied with a group called The Motion Picture Alliance for the Preservation of American Ideals, which was an anti-Communist and anti-Semitic organization. And though Walt himself, in my estimation, was not anti-Semitic, nevertheless, he willingly allied himself with people who were anti-Semitic, and that reputation stuck. He was never really able to expunge it throughout his life.")

The quote at the bottom of your quote had me think of Walt Disney - but the book is about Henry Ford?

Ford is mentioned in the book along with the Bush's, Dulles', Rockefellars (no surprise), Harrimens, Clintons and Warburg's.

I know the other names, and their questionable rise to fortune and power, but Clinton?

I know his and Hillary's history has some interesting footnotes. Does their name go back in history, or did they sell their souls directly?

Don't forget the Kennedy's either. Another power family with some serious ghosts in the closet.

To the so called skeptics;

History as it is taught is not gospel, and alternative theories are often complete BS. Read both and make your own decisions, that is what being open minded is. When I was a kid mankind settled the Americas via the land bridge from Asia to N America. This was the gospel truth, but now it is known to be incorrect, and for years the only mention of alternatives to the land bridge theory that I read were in books where the authors argued the conventional wisdom and speculated on alternate routes. Use your ounce of skepticism and learn something, because I am noticing that the "conspiracy theorists" in this thread are the only ones with facts to contribute.

because I am noticing that the "conspiracy theorists" in this thread are the only ones with facts to contribute.

I think you mean opinions.

The quote at the bottom of your quote had me think of Walt Disney - but the book is about Henry Ford?

Ford is mentioned in the book along with the Bush's, Dulles', Rockefellars (no surprise), Harrimens, Clintons and Warburg's.

Ya, the second bit is about Walt. But he was never very vocal about his political views. Henry Ford did have allot of history with the Nazi party though. Adolf was said to have had a picture of him in his office, and the Nazi's actually gave Henry Ford a medal. But after the war Ford made some big public apology and it's supposed to be all better after that. Very convenient.

this kind of dribble makes sense.

As for this dribble making sense,

Point of order:

http://www.wsu.edu/~brians/errors/dribble.html

"Dribble" and "drivel" originally meant the same thing: drool. But the two words have become differentiated. When you mean to criticize someone else[HTML_REMOVED]#8217;s speech as stupid or pointless, the word you want is "drivel."

http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/drivel

Main Entry: 1driv.el
Pronunciation: \[HTML_REMOVED]#712;dri-v[HTML_REMOVED]#601;l\
Function: intransitive verb

2 : to talk stupidly and carelessly

You're welcome!!

Kn.

ok Ken we all know you have a spelling and grammar stick up yer arse but this is taking it a little too far.

:P

ok Ken we all know you have a spelling and grammar stick up yer arse but this is taking it a little too far.

:P

Okay … it's (ahem) stupid and pointless …

But I bet you learned something new!

Kn.

The fucking morons in this thread.

Agreed.

To the so called skeptics;

History as it is taught is not gospel, and alternative theories are often complete BS. Read both and make your own decisions, that is what being open minded is. When I was a kid mankind settled the Americas via the land bridge from Asia to N America. This was the gospel truth, but now it is known to be incorrect, and for years the only mention of alternatives to the land bridge theory that I read were in books where the authors argued the conventional wisdom and speculated on alternate routes. Use your ounce of skepticism and learn something, because I am noticing that the "conspiracy theorists" in this thread are the only ones with facts to contribute.

No, when you were a kid, the landbridge theory was the best one with the available evidence. More research proved otherwise, and they updated their knowledge and teaching. THAT'S HOW ITS SUPPOSED TO WORK.

Lets use another analogy. Aliens. Lets say tomorrow an alien race comes to earth. That doesn't mean that the conspiracy theorists and UFO enthusiasts are vindicated. Their retarded conclusions based on insane evidence are still fucking stupid.

There is nothing wrong with updating your views or being wrong, hell, buddy could be right: there could be secret Nazi overlords, alien overlords, AND psychic warfare all going on at the same time… and in the years to come people will look on him as a prophet. But the point is, buddy came to his conclusions a) to sell books to stupid people, and b) with totally ridiculous evidence.

Nobody seems to have answered my question from before: why wouldn't he absolutely ROCK the historical community (which is what every eager grad student wants to do) if his evidence is good?

Nobody seems to have answered my question from before: why wouldn't he absolutely ROCK the historical community (which is what every eager grad student wants to do) if his evidence is good?

But if you interpret his sources in a way that would not withstand peer review, you can write sensational books and make a mint.

I know the other names, and their questionable rise to fortune and power, but Clinton?

I know his and Hillary's history has some interesting footnotes. Does their name go back in history, or did they sell their souls directly?

Don't forget the Kennedy's either. Another power family with some serious ghosts in the closet.

True - Clintons dont have historical ties in the same sense, just recent political connections on CFR or Tri Lat Commitee's. I should've inserted the Schiffe name.

Kennedy's have an interesting history too. I remember reading somewhere Joe Kennedy was a commie by McCarthy and JFK had issued is Pres Order for the US to print money outside of the Fed Res - which a storied passed Pres/Board member selection.

L Ron - if I COD'd this to you, would dat be ok?