did Hillary get hurt falling off the bandwagon...?

I saw Bill on TV last night saying the same thing. Sorry kids, you have real competition and that really pisses you off.

Clinton: Obama Ignores Accomplishments

Townhall, by Michael Graczyk


2/16/2008 4:24:49 AM

Former President Clinton on Friday accused Sen. Barack Obama, his wife's rival for the Democratic nomination, of trying to ignore any accomplishments they achieved during their years in the White House. "You have one candidate who's made the explicit argument that the only way we can change America is to move into a post-partisan future and therefore we have to eliminate from consideration for the presidency anybody who made good things happen in the '90s


So, it was a co-presidency?

Saturday, February 16, 2008

Mark Steyn: Obama the Muzak Messiah of the pseudo-revolution

By MARK STEYN -- Syndicated columnist


These days, Obama worshippers file two kinds of columns. The first school is well-represented by Ezra Klein, the elderly bobby-soxer of The American Prospect:

"Obama's finest speeches do not excite. They do not inform. They don't even really inspire. They elevate. They enmesh you in a grander moment, as if history has stopped flowing passively by, and, just for an instant, contracted around you, made you aware of its presence, and your role in it. He is not the Word made flesh, but the triumph of word over flesh, over color, over despair."

Er, OK, if you say so.

It seems to me that Barack Obama is the triumph of flesh, color and despair over word – that's to say, he offers an appealing embodiment of identity politics plus a ludicrously despairing vision of contemporary America (sample: "Trade deals like NAFTA ship jobs overseas and force parents to compete with their teenagers to work for minimum wage at Wal-Mart") that triumphs over anything so prosaic as a policy platform.

On the other hand, if you're running for president not as an unexceptional first-term senator with a thin resume but as the new Messiah, the new Kennedy, the new Gandhi, the new Martin Luther King, you can't blame folks for leaping ahead to the next stage in the mythic narrative. Around the world, a second instant subgenre has sprung up in which commentators speculate how long it will be before some deranged Christian-fundamentalist neo-Nazi gun-nut deprives America of its fleeting wisp of glory. Setting a new standard for fevered, slavering Obama assassination porn, Earl MacRae warned Canadians in The Ottawa Sun:

"To be black and catapulting toward the presidency on charm, intellect and popularity is unacceptable to the racist paranoid and scary in America the beautiful. … They do not want to hear that he is a better American than they are, these right-wing extremist fascists in the land of America who no doubt believe it's God's will Barack Obama not get to the White House, no method of deterrence out of bounds, in their zealotry to protect and perpetuate Roy Rogers, John Wayne, Mom's apple pie and the cross of Jesus in every home."

By this point, Mr. MacRae wasn't so much warming to his theme as typing up his first draft for Miramax:

"Barack Obama is waving his arms. The crowd is cheering. … I see Barack Obama, one minute smiling, the people crying his name. I see Barack Obama grab his chest and his eyes widen and his mouth opens, and the crowd screams as Barack Obama, black candidate for the presidency of the United States of America, falls to the ground, dead, an assassin's bullet inside him."

Er, OK.

Right now Obama's more at risk of being taken out by traces of polonium-210 left in his hotel by a Clinton operative than by Roy Rogers saddling up for Jesus. Every president is a target for assassination, though George W. Bush is unique in having been the subject of explicit murder fantasies by so many non-right-wing nonextremist impeccably reasonable artists (the British movie "Death Of A President"; the novella "Checkpoint" by Nicholson Baker) and even the occasional straightforward exhortation: "On Nov. 2, the entire civilized world will be praying, praying Bush loses," wrote Charlie Brooker in London's Guardian in 2004. "John Wilkes Booth, Lee Harvey Oswald, John Hinckley Jr. – where are you now that we need you?"

Well, wherever they are, they're probably saying: "Why bring us into it? When Lee Harvey decided it was time for JFK to get assassinated, he didn't sit around whining, 'John Wilkes Booth, where are you now that I need you?' Get off your butt and do it yourself, you big Euro-ninny." Ah, but for the armchair insurgents of the Western Left, the vicarious frisson is more than delicious enough. Anything else would interfere with dinner plans.

The Bush assassination fantasies are concocted by his political opponents and at least arise from his acts – invading the world; slaughtering 14 million Iraqi civilians; shredding the Constitution. By contrast, the Obama assassination porn is written by his worshippers and testifies to one of the most palpable features of the senator's campaign – its faintly ersatz quality, its determination to appropriate Camelot and every other mythic narrative.

A few days ago, a local news team went to shoot some film at Obama's Houston campaign headquarters. Behind the desks of the perky gals answering the phones were posters of Che Guevara and Cuban flags. Do Obama's volunteers even know who Che is? Apart from being a really cool guy on posters and T-shirts, like James Dean or Bart Simpson. I doubt it. They're pseudo-revolutionaries. Very few people in America want a real revolution: Life is great, this is a terrific country, with unparalleled economic opportunities.

To be sure, it's a tougher break if you have the misfortune to be the victim of one of Lyndon Johnson's Great Society programs or a decrepit inner-city grade school with a higher per-student budget than the wealthiest parts of Switzerland. But even so, to be born a U.S. citizen is, as Cecil Rhodes once said of England, to win first prize in the lottery of life.

Not even Obama supporters want real revolution: Ask the many peoples around the world for whom revolution means not a lame-o Sixties poster above your desk but the carnage and horror of the day before yesterday.

Poor mean, vengeful Hillary, heading for a one-way ticket on the Oblivion Express, has a point. Barack Obama is an elevator Muzak dinner-theater reduction of all the glibbest hand-me-down myths in liberal iconography – which is probably why he's a shoo-in. The problems facing America – unsustainable entitlements, broken borders, nuclearizing enemies – require tough solutions, not gaseous Sesame Street platitudes. But, unlike the whose-turn-is-it? GOP, Mrs. Clinton's crowd generally picks the new kid on the block: Jimmy Carter, Bill Clinton, Barack Obama. I wonder if Hillary Rodham, Goldwater Girl of 1964, ever wishes she'd stuck with her original party.

©MARK STEYN

Don't be scared LP. If Obama wins the election it won't be the end of the world.

Will be a good test of how much the school system has done away with the thought process of our citizens! Do they want a good leader or just a good blatherskite artist, IOW, a Guru, Swami, Mystic or Yogi.?

I'm banking on American Spirit to take care of the situatiion on election day!

don't bank on diebold

beware the mob

Obama's Gloomy Big-Government Vision

Real Clear Politics, by Larry Kudlow


2/16/2008 4:46:21 PM

Senator Barack Obama is very gloomy about America, and he's aligning himself with the liberal wing of the Democratic party in hopes of coming to the nation's rescue. His proposal? Big-government planning, spending, and taxing -- exactly what the nation and the stock market doesn't want to hear. Obama unveiled much of his economic strategy in Wisconsin this week: He wants to spend $150 billion on a green-energy plan.

Friends Like These

Investors Business Daily, by Staff


2/16/2008 4:32:10 PM


It always helps to know how America's enemies size up presidential candidates. South of our border, for example, Barack Obama draws praise from Nicaragua's dictator as John McCain enrages Cuba's. Daniel Ortega, the Marxist whom President Reagan once called "the little dictator," is feeling the love these days. Perpetually at odds with Reagan, who funded the Contra resistance in a war against his bid to turn Nicaragua into a Soviet beachhead, Ortega is pleased with what he sees in Barack Obama.

OBAMA ROBBED IN NY

By GINGER ADAMS OTIS
New York Post

February 16, 2008 -- Barack Obama's primary-night results were strikingly under recorded in several congressional districts around the city - in some cases leaving him with zero votes when, in fact, he had pulled in hundreds, the Board of Elections said today

Unofficial primary results gave Obama no votes in nearly 80 districts, including Harlem's 94th and other historically black areas - but many of those initial tallies proved to be wildly off the mark, the Board of Elections confirmed.

Truth is, in some districts getting a recount, the senator from Illinois is even close to defeating Hillary Clinton.

Initial results in the 94th District, for example, showed a 141-0 sweep for the New York senator, but Board of Elections spokeswoman Valerie Vazquez said today that the ongoing recount had changed the tally to 261-136.

As yet, none of the results has been certified, Vazquez said, adding that the Board of Elections had begun a painstaking ballot-by-ballot canvassing of all voting machines four days after the Feb. 5 election.

"We are doing a recanvass, and we will be counting all paper ballots, including absentee ones," Vazquez said.

"Some initial tallies had zeros, but it was most likely due to human error. Those were unofficial numbers, and no confirmed results have been released yet."

In a predominantly black Brooklyn district for which Clinton was given credit for a 118-0 victory on Primary Night, the Board of Elections' latest figures indicate that she may not even come out the winner - Obama currently has 116 votes to her 118.

You keep on putting that rightwing bs up. Bottom line, Obama could be a cross-dressing, tax evading serial killer and still have more sense and morals than your boy George.

Diebold hegemony usurped by humans.

Obama’s Communist Mentor


AIM Column | By Cliff Kincaid | February 18, 2008

Is “coalition politics” at work in Obama’s rise to power?

Photo by Joe Crimmings*

In his biography of Barack Obama, David Mendell writes about Obama's life as a "secret smoker" and how he "went to great lengths to conceal the habit." But what about Obama's secret political life? It turns out that Obama's childhood mentor, Frank Marshall Davis, was a communist.

In his books, Obama admits attending "socialist conferences" and.........

thats cool

nobody cared Prescott Bush collaborated with Hitler

I mean REALLY, people

bush has CONFESSED to committing a felony

a conspiracy, by true definition

A single warrantless wiretap on a US citizen is a felony.

Jeez LP. That's pretty lame. He's a secret smoker?

ooooooooohhhh, that's scary.

If W were just a secret smoker. More people would be alive.

International business strings it together with thin lines ---

seized under the act in October and November 1942 ---

The John Loftus item is the only thing that makes me a bit
suspicious of their dealings.

Loftus gives some strong opinions of his own here --- but does not document them, IMO.


How the Bush family made
its fortune from the Nazis

Posted by Robert Lederman
mailto:robert.lederman@worldnet.att.net
February 9, 2002

Note: This article's author, John Loftus, is a former U.S. Department of Justice Nazi War Crimes prosecutor, the President of the Florida Holocaust Museum and the highly respected author of numerous books on the CIA-Nazi connection including The Belarus Secret and The Secret War Against the Jews, both of which have extensive material on the Bush-Rockefeller-Nazi connection.

Copyright September 27, 2000
by Attorney John Loftus

The Dutch Connection

How a famous American family
made its fortune from the Nazis

For the Bush family, it is a lingering nightmare. For their Nazi clients, the Dutch connection was the mother of all money laundering schemes. From 1945 until 1949, one of the lengthiest and, it now appears, most futile interrogations of a Nazi war crimes suspect began in the American Zone of Occupied Germany. Multibillionaire steel magnate Fritz Thyssen-the man whose steel combine was the cold heart of the Nazi war machine-talked and talked and talked to a joint US-UK interrogation team. For four long years, successive teams of inquisitors tried to break Thyssen's simple claim to possess neither foreign bank accounts nor interests in foreign corporations, no assets that might lead to the missing billions in assets of the Third Reich. The inquisitors failed utterly.

Why? Because what the wily Thyssen deposed was, in a sense, true. What the Allied investigators never understood was that they were not asking Thyssen the right question. Thyssen did not need any foreign bank accounts because his family secretly owned an entire chain of banks. He did not have to transfer his Nazi assets at the end of World War II, all he had to do was transfer the ownership documents - stocks, bonds, deeds and trusts--from his bank in Berlin through his bank in Holland to his American friends in New York City: Prescott Bush and Herbert Walker. Thyssen's partners in crime were the father and father-in-law of a future President of the United States.

The allied investigators underestimated Thyssen's reach, his connections, his motives, and his means. The web of financial entities Thyssen helped create in the 1920's remained a mystery for the rest of the twentieth century, an almost perfectly hidden underground sewer pipeline for moving dirty money, money that bankrolled the post-war fortunes not only of the Thyssen industrial empire...but the Bush family as well. It was a secret Fritz Thyssen would take to his grave.

It was a secret that would lead former US intelligence agent William Gowen, now pushing 80, to the very doorstep of the Dutch royal family. The Gowens are no strangers to controversy or nobility. His father was one of President Roosevelt's diplomatic emissaries to Pope Pius XII, leading a futile attempt to persuade the Vatican to denounce Hitler's treatment of Jews. It was his son, William Gowen, who served in Rome after World War II as a Nazi hunter and investigator with the U.S. Army Counter Intelligence Corps. It was Agent Gowen who first discovered the secret Vatican Ratline for smuggling Nazis in 1949. It was also the same William Gowen who began to uncover the secret Dutch pipeline for smuggling Nazi money in 1999.

A half-century earlier, Fritz Thyssen was telling the allied investigators that he had no interest in foreign companies, that Hitler had turned on him and seized most of his property. His remaining assets were mostly in the Russian Occupied Zone of Germany (which he knew were a write-off anyway). His distant (and disliked) relatives in neutral nations like Holland were the actual owners of a substantial percentage of the remaining German industrial base. As innocent victims of the Third Reich, they were lobbying the allied occupation governments in Germany, demanding restitution of the property that had been seized from them by the Nazis.

Under the rules of the Allied occupation of Germany, all property owned by citizens of a neutral nation which had been seized by the Nazis had to be returned to the neutral citizens upon proper presentation of documents showing proof of ownership. Suddenly, all sorts of neutral parties, particularly in Holland, were claiming ownership of various pieces of the Thyssen empire. In his cell, Fritz Thyssen just smiled and waited to be released from prison while members of the Dutch royal family and the Dutch intelligence service reassembled his pre-war holdings for him.

The British and American interrogators may have gravely underestimated Thyssen but they nonetheless knew they were being lied to. Their suspicions focused on one Dutch Bank in particular, the Bank voor Handel en Scheepvaart, in Rotterdam. This bank did a lot of business with the Thyssens over the years. In 1923, as a favor to him, the Rotterdam bank loaned the money to build the very first Nazi party headquarters in Munich. But somehow the allied investigations kept going nowhere, the intelligence leads all seemed to dry up.

If the investigators realized that the US intelligence chief in postwar Germany, Allen Dulles, was also the Rotterdam bank's lawyer, they might have asked some very interesting questions. They did not know that Thyssen was Dulles' client as well. Nor did they ever realize that it was Allen Dulles's other client, Baron Kurt Von Schroeder who was the Nazi trustee for the Thyssen companies which now claimed to be owned by the Dutch. The Rotterdam Bank was at the heart of Dulles' cloaking scheme, and he guarded its secrets jealously.

Several decades after the war, investigative reporter Paul Manning, Edward R. Murrow's colleague, stumbled across the Thyssen interrogations in the US National Archives. Manning intended to write a book about Nazi money laundering. Manning's manuscript was a dagger at Allen Dulles' throat: his book specifically mentioned the Bank voor Handel en Scheepvaart by name, albeit in passing. Dulles volunteered to help the unsuspecting Manning with his manuscript, and sent him on a wild goose chase, searching for Martin Bormann in South America.

Without knowing that he had been deliberately sidetracked, Manning wrote a forward to his book personally thanking Allen Dulles for his "assurance that I was "on the right track, and should keep going.'"Dulles sent Manning and his manuscript off into the swamps of obscurity. The same "search for Martin Bormann"scam was also used to successfully discredit Ladislas Farago, another American journalist probing too far into the laundering of Nazi money. American investigators had to be sent anywhere but Holland.

And so the Dutch connection remained unexplored until 1994 when I published the book "The Secret War Against the Jews."As a matter of historical curiosity, I mentioned that Fritz Thyssen (and indirectly, the Nazi Party) had obtained their early financing from Brown Brothers Harriman, and its affiliate, the Union Banking Corporation. Union Bank, in turn, was the Bush family's holding company for a number of other entities, including the "Holland American Trading Company."

It was a matter of public record that the Bush holdings were seized by the US government after the Nazis overran Holland. In 1951, the Bush's reclaimed Union Bank from the US Alien Property Custodian, along with their "neutral" Dutch assets. I did not realize it, but I had stumbled across a very large piece of the missing Dutch connection. Bush's ownership of the Holland-American investment company was the missing link to Manning's earlier research in the Thyssen investigative files. In 1981, Manning had written:

"Thyssen's first step in a long dance of tax and currency frauds began [in the late 1930's] when he disposed of his shares in the Dutch Hollandische-Amerikanische Investment Corporation to be credited to the Bank voor Handel en Scheepvaart, N.V., Rotterdam, the bank founded in 1916 by August Thyssen Senior."

In this one obscure paragraph, in a little known book, Manning had unwittingly documented two intriguing points: 1) The Bush's Union Bank had apparently bought the same corporate stock that the Thyssens were selling as part of their Nazi money laundering, and 2) the Rotterdam Bank, far from being a neutral Dutch institution, was founded by Fritz Thyssen's father. In hindsight, Manning and I had uncovered different ends of the Dutch connection.

After reading the excerpt in my book about the Bush's ownership of the Holland-American trading Company, retired US intelligence agent William Gowen began to put the pieces of the puzzle together. Mr. Gowen knew every c orner of Europe from his days as a diplomat's son, an American intelligence agent, and a newspaperman. William Gowen deserves sole credit for uncovering the mystery of how the Nazi industrialists hid their money from the Allies at the end of World War II.

In 1999, Mr. Gowen traveled to Europe, at his own expense, to meet a former member of Dutch intelligence who had detailed inside information about the Rotterdam bank. The scrupulous Gowen took a written statement and then had his source read and correct it for error. Here, in summary form, is how the Nazis hid their money in America.

After World War I, August Thyssen had been badly burned by the loss of assets under the harsh terms of the Versailles treaty. He was determined that it would never happen again. One of his sons would join the Nazis; the other would be neutral. No matter who won the next war, the Thyssen family would survive with their industrial empire intact. Fritz Thyssen joined the Nazis in 1923; his younger brother married into Hungarian nobility and changed his name to Baron Thyssen-Bornemisza. The Baron later claimed Hungarian as well as Dutch citizenship. In public, he pretended to detest his Nazi brother, but in private they met at secret board meetings in Germany to coordinate their operations. If one brother were threatened with loss of property, he would transfer his holdings to the other.

To aid his sons in their shell game, August Thyssen had established three different banks during the 1920's -- The August Thyssen Bank in Berlin, the Bank voor Handel en Scheepvaart in Rotterdam, and the Union Banking Corporation in New York City. To protect their corporate holdings, all the brothers had to do was move the corporate paperwork from one bank to the other. This they did with some regularity. When Fritz Thyssen "sold" the Holland-American Trading Company for a tax loss, the Union Banking Corporation in New York bought the stock. Similarly, the Bush family invested the disguised Nazi profits in American steel and manufacturing corporations that became part of the secret Thyssen empire.

When the Nazis invaded Holland in May 1940, they investigated the Bank voor Handel en Scheepvaart in Rotterdam. Fritz Thyssen was suspected by Hitler's auditors of being a tax fraud and of illegally transferring his wealth outside the Third Reich. The Nazi auditors were right: Thyssen felt that Hitler's economic policies would dilute his wealth through ruinous war inflation. He had been smuggling his war profits out through Holland. But the Rotterdam vaults were empty of clues to where the money had gone. The Nazis did not know that all of the documents evidencing secret Thyssen ownership had been quietly shipped back to the August Thyssen Bank in Berlin, under the friendly supervision of Baron Kurt Von Schroeder. Thyssen spent the rest of the war under VIP house arrest. He had fooled Hitler, hidden his immense profits, and now it was time to fool the Americans with same shell game.

As soon as Berlin fell to the allies, it was time to ship the documents back to Rotterdam so that the "neutral" bank could claim ownership under the friendly supervision of Allen Dulles, who, as the OSS intelligence chief in 1945 Berlin, was well placed to handle any troublesome investigations. Unfortunately, the August Thyssen Bank had been bombed during the war, and the documents were buried in the underground vaults beneath the rubble. Worse, the vaults lay in the Soviet Zone of Berlin.

According to Gowen's source, Prince Bernhard commanded a unit of Dutch intelligence, which dug up the incriminating corporate papers in 1945 and brought them back to the "neutral" bank in Rotterdam. The pretext was that the Nazis had stolen the crown jewels of his wife, Princess Juliana, and the Russians gave the Dutch permission to dig up the vault and retrieve them. Operation Juliana was a Dutch fraud on the Allies who searched high and low for the missing pieces of the Thyssen fortune.

In 1945, the former Dutch manager of the Rotterdam bank resumed control only to discover that he was sitting on a huge pile of hidden Nazi assets. In 1947, the manager threatened to inform Dutch authorities, and was immediately fired by the Thyssens. The somewhat naive bank manager then fled to New York City where he intended to talk to Union Bank director Prescott Bush. As Gowen's Dutch source recalled, the manager intended "to reveal [to Prescott Bush] the truth about Baron Heinrich and the Rotterdam Bank, [in order that] some or all of the Thyssen interests in the Thyssen Group might be seized and confiscated as German enemy property. "The manager's body was found in New York two weeks later.

Similarly, in 1996 a Dutch journalist Eddy Roever went to London to interview the Baron, who was neighbors with Margaret Thatcher. Roever's body was discovered two days later. Perhaps, Gowen remarked dryly, it was only a coincidence that both healthy men had died of heart attacks immediately after trying to uncover the truth about the Thyssens.

Neither Gowen nor his Dutch source knew about the corroborating evidence in the Alien Property Custodian archives or in the OMGUS archives. Together, the two separate sets of US files overlap each other and directly corroborate Gowen's source. The first set of archives confirms absolutely that the Union Banking Corporation in New York was owned by the Rotterdam Bank. The second set (quoted by Manning) confirms that the Rotterdam Bank in turn was owned by the Thyssens.

It is not surprising that these two American agencies never shared their Thyssen files. As the noted historian Burton Hersh documented:

"The Alien Property Custodian, Leo Crowley, was on the payroll of the New York J. Henry Schroeder Bank where Foster and Allen Dulles both sat as board members. Foster arranged an appointment for himself as special legal counsel for the Alien Property Custodian while simultaneously representing [German] interests against the custodian."

No wonder Allen Dulles had sent Paul Manning on a wild goose chase to South America. He was very close to uncovering the fact that the Bush's bank in New York City was secretly owned by the Nazis, before during and after WWII. Once Thyssen ownership of the Union Banking Corporation is proven, it makes out a prima facie case of treason against the Dulles and Bush families for giving aid and comfort to the enemy in time of war.

PART TWO

The first key fact to be proven in any criminal case is that the Thyssen family secretly owned the Bush's Bank. Apart from Gowen's source, and the twin American files, a third set of corroboration comes from the Thyssen family themselves. In 1979, the present Baron Thyssen-Bornemisza (Fritz Thyssen's nephew) prepared a written family history to be shared with his top management. A copy of this thirty-page tome entitled "The History of the Thyssen Family and Their Activities"was provided by Gowen's source. It contains the following Thyssen admissions:

"Thus, at the beginning of World War II the Bank voor Handel en Scheepvaart had become the holding of my father's companies - a Dutch firm whose only shareholder was a Hungarian citizen..Prior to 1929, it held the shares of .the August Thyssen Bank, and also American subsidiaries and the Union Banking Corporation, New York.The shares of all the affiliates were [in 1945] with the August Thyssen Bank in the East Sector of Berlin, from where I was able to have them transferred into the West at the last moment"

"After the war the Dutch government ordered an investigation into the status of the holding company and, pending the result, appointed a Dutch former general manager of my father who turned against our family.. In that same year, 1947, I returned to Germany for the first time after the war, disguised as a Dutch driver in military uniform, to establish contact with our German directors"

"The situation of the Group gradually began to be resolved but it was not until 1955 that the German companies were freed from Allied control and subsequently disentangled. Fortunately, the companies in the group suffered little from dismantling. At last we were in a position to concentrate on purely economic problems -- the reconstruction and extension of the companies and the expansion of the organization."

"The banking department of the Bank voor Handel en Scheepvaart, which also functioned as the Group's holding company, merged in 1970 with Nederlandse Credietbank N.V. which increased its capital. The Group received 25 percent.The Chase Manhattan Bank holds 31%. The name Thyssen-Bornemisza Group was selected for the new holding company."

Thus the twin US Archives, Gowen's Dutch source, and the Thyssen family history all independently confirm that President Bush's father and grandfather served on the board of a bank that was secretly owned by the leading Nazi industrialists. The Bush connection to these American institutions is a matter of public record. What no one knew, until Gowen's brilliant research opened the door, was that the Thyssens were the secret employers of the Bush family.

But what did the Bush family know about their Nazi connection and when did they know it? As senior managers of Brown Brothers Harriman, they had to have known that their American clients, such as the Rockefellers, were investing heavily in German corporations, including Thyssen's giant Vereinigte Stahlwerke. As noted historian Christopher Simpson repeatedly documents, it is a matter of public record that Brown Brother's investments in Nazi Germany took place under the Bush family stewardship.

When war broke out was Prescott Bush stricken with a case of Waldheimers disease, a sudden amnesia about his Nazi past? Or did he really believe that our friendly Dutch allies owned the Union Banking Corporation and its parent bank in Rotterdam? It should be recalled that in January 1937, he hired Allen Dulles to "cloak" his accounts. But cloak from whom? Did he expect that happy little Holland was going to declare war on America? The cloaking operation only makes sense in anticipation of a possible war with Nazi Germany. If Union Bank was not the conduit for laundering the Rockefeller's Nazi investments back to America, then how could the Rockefeller-controlled Chase Manhattan Bank end up owning 31% of the Thyssen group after the war?

It should be noted that the Thyssen group (TBG) is now the largest industrial conglomerate in Germany, and with a net worth of more than $50 billion dollars, one of the wealthiest corporations in the world. TBG is so rich it even bought out the Krupp family, famous arms makers for Hitler, leaving the Thyssens as the undisputed champion survivors of the Third Reich. Where did the Thyssens get the start-up money to rebuild their empire with such speed after World War II?

The enormous sums of money deposited into the Union Bank prior to 1942 is the best evidence that Prescott Bush knowingly served as a money launderer for the Nazis. Remember that Union Banks' books and accounts were frozen by the U.S. Alien Property Custodian in 1942 and not released back to the Bush family until 1951. At that time, Union Bank shares representing hundreds of millions of dollars worth of industrial stocks and bonds were unblocked for distribution. Did the Bush family really believe that such enormous sums came from Dutch enterprises? One could sell tulip bulbs and wooden shoes for centuries and not achieve those sums. A fortune this size could only have come from the Thyssen profits made from rearming the Third Reich, and then hidden, first from the Nazi tax auditors, and then from the Allies.

The Bushes knew perfectly well that Brown Brothers was the American money channel into Nazi Germany, and that Union Bank was the secret pipeline to bring the Nazi money back to America from Holland. The Bushes had to have known how the secret money circuit worked because they were on the board of directors in both directions: Brown Brothers out, Union Bank in.

Moreover, the size of their compensation is commensurate with their risk as Nazi money launderers. In 1951, Prescott Bush and his father in law each received one share of Union Bank stock, worth $750,000 each. One and a half million dollars was a lot of money in 1951. But then, from the Thyssen point of view, buying the Bushes was the best bargain of the war.

The bottom line is harsh: It is bad enough that the Bush family helped raise the money for Thyssen to give Hitler his start in the 1920's, but giving aid and comfort to the enemy in time of war is treason. The Bush's bank helped the Thyssens make the Nazi steel that killed allied soldiers. As bad as financing the Nazi war machine may seem, aiding and abetting the Holocaust was worse. Thyssen's coal mines used Jewish slaves as if they were disposable chemicals. There are six million skeletons in the Thyssen family closet, and a myriad of criminal and historical questions to be answered about the Bush family's complicity.



This article is provided
courtesy of Dr. Leonard G. Horowitz
and Tetrahedron, LLC
206 North 4th Avenue, Suite 147
Sandpoint, Idaho 83864

Big news........................


Nader Could Be Launching Third Party Bid

Will discuss possible White House run Sunday on NBC's Meet the Press

MSNBC.com
The Associated Press
updated 12:26 p.m. ET, Fri., Feb. 22, 2008

Excerpt:

WASHINGTON - Ralph Nader could be poised for another third party presidential campaign.

The consumer advocate will appear on NBC's "Meet the Press" on Sunday. Nader launched his 2004 presidential run on the show.

A spokesman for Nader did not immediately return a call seeking comment.

Kevin Zeese, who was Nader's spokesman during the 2004 presidential race, but is no longer working for him, said Friday that Nader has been actively talking to "lots of people on all sorts of levels" about the possibility of making another run.

Zeese said he could only guess what Nader might do, but added: "Obviously, I don't think ("Meet the Press" host) Tim Russert would have him on for no reason."

Last month, Nader began an exploratory presidential campaign and launched a Web site that promises to fight "corporate greed, corporate power, corporate control."

Nader's appearance on "Meet the Press" was announced Friday in an e-mail message from Nader's exploratory campaign. The message from "The Nader Team" urges supporters to tell friends and family to watch the show and requests online contributions.

"As you know, we've been exploring the possibilities in recent weeks," the message says.

Nader is still loathed by many Democrats who call him a spoiler and claim his candidacy in 2000 cost Democrats the election by siphoning votes away from Al Gore in a razor-thin contest in Florida.

Nader has vociferously disputed the spoiler claim, saying only Democrats are to blame for losing the race to George W. Bush.

Actually most of us cant wait for all the free goodies and snacks coming our way with Obama.

all the fried chicken and watermelon you can eat

"My experiences at Princeton have made me far more aware of my 'blackness' than ever before," the future Mrs. Obama wrote in her thesis introduction. "I have found that at Princeton, no matter how liberal and open-minded some of my white professors and classmates try to be toward me, I sometimes feel like a visitor on campus; as if I really don't belong. Regardless of the circumstances underwhich I interact with whites at Princeton, it often seems as if, to them, I will always be black first and a student second."


_Michelle Obama


I guess it even applies to those on the grade school playground.

all the knives and bullets you can eat

Yes, when he confiscates my property then I can have my meals delivered to the old folks' kitchen; goody goody!

foreclosures shot up to an all-time high UNDER BUSH

All the stigmata, social, educational, religious, political, etc., of our Origional Sin, Slavery, will be forever with us, I have yet to determine who is having the most difficult time of letting them go - blacks or whites! Think how long the Jews and Palistanians have been ostracized!

Michelle Obama thesis was on racial divide
Politico, by Jeffrey Ressner

Original Article <---Here

Posted By:Blue Moon, 2/22/2008 5:45:21 PM

Michelle Obama's senior year thesis at Princeton University, obtained exclusively from the campaign by Politico, shows a document written by a young woman grappling with a society in which a black Princeton alumnus might only be allowed to remain "on the periphery." "My experiences at Princeton have made me far more aware of my 'blackness' than ever before," the future Mrs. Obama wrote in her thesis introduction.

Comments:

Go ahead LP. You guys called Teresa Heinz a whore so I expect no less this time. You Republicans just looooove going after wives don't you? Hell, you go after each other's wives! Said McCain's wife was a drug addict. Slandered her good too didn't you?

You bring it on mofos, this is a different kind of election. You aren't going to have John Kerry to walk over. It won't be a free ride for you swiftboating pigs.

Funny we point out that michelle obamas thesis included the fact that liberals and progressives were the racists at Princeton. In her words. And suddenly conservatives are attacking wives.


Go take your medication.

http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0208/8642.html <-- Article

http://lucianne.com/threads2.asp?artnum=387184 < --- Commments by others - all 125 of them FYI

People get into stupid loans and its all bush.

Gotta luv liberal logic.................


no foreclosures under obama. the government can pick up the tab.

Universal mortgage for all!

You must have wet your pants and crapped in your shorts when the NYT came out and tried to SWIFTBOAT MCCAIN THIS WEEK!


RANT ON FOOL.

McCain Disputed On 1999 Meeting
Broadcaster Recalls Urging FCC Contact
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/conte...ST2008022203188

Broadcaster Lowell "Bud" Paxson yesterday contradicted statements from Sen. John McCain's presidential campaign that the senator did not meet with Paxson or his lobbyist before sending two controversial letters to the Federal Communications Commission on Paxson's behalf.

He has some serious problems with ethics. He's old school like Murtha.

he's the blood offerring from the GOP

You have chosen to ignore all posts from: inyerface.

Doesn't this guy ever shut up?

Dude, he still can't yapping about the twin towers for Pete's sake. You do the math!

you can't say you weren't told

Mrs O: The truth about Michelle Obama's 'working class' credentials

The Daily Mail <-----Here

By SHARON CHURCHER -



................"Michelle was from a middle-class family," confirmed one of her long-time friends, Angela Acree.


"She came from a regular family. They had a nice home. It wasn't a mansion, but it was just fine. It was a decent neighbourhood."


The Robinsons grew up on the upper floor of a house built in the Twenties. Number 7436 South Euclid Avenue - a classical reference to the Greek mathematician which found an appropriate echo in Michelle's subsequent respect for traditional learning - even has a small garden, shaded by a large elm tree, and an ornate stone bench.


The South Side of Chicago has long had its share of gang-infested housing 'projects' but with the University of Chicago hospital close by, there were plenty of white professionals in the area as well as hard-working families in the Robinsons' own image.


No one could pretend they were rich and it is true that her father, Frasier Robinson, spent some time as a maintenance worker for Chicago's Department of Water Management.


However, he was a good deal more than the labourer that many seem to imagine.


Indeed, according to family friends, Michelle's father was a volunteer organiser for the city's Democratic Party, a by-word for machine politics in America, and his loyalty was rewarded with a well-paid engineering job at Chicago's water plant. Even before overtime, he earned $42,686 - 25 per cent more than High School teachers at the time .


Michelle's mother stayed at home and devoted her energies to her and her older brother Craig. Marian Robinson nurtured great ambitions for both her children, along with the traditional values which are now serving Michelle so well.


Television was all but banned in favour of homework, debates about the issues of the day and improving games of chess.


Bright and determined, Michelle was awarded a place at one of Chicago's first 'magnet' schools, which offered special programmes for gifted children. By the time she was 13, she was taking a college-level biology course.................

Jesus Christ. So now you're going after Michelle Obama's father?

I will be glad when you swiftboaters are voted out of government.

I think it's going to backfire this election.

We are sick and forking tired of it.

Drudge ---





CLINTON STAFFERS CIRCULATE 'DRESSED' OBAMA
Mon Feb 25 2008 06:51:00 ET

With a week to go until the Texas and Ohio primaries, stressed Clinton staffers circulated a photo over the weekend of a "dressed" Barack Obama.

The photo, taken in 2006, shows the Democrat frontrunner fitted as a Somali Elder, during his visit to Wajir, a rural area in northeastern Kenya.

The senator was on a five-country tour of Africa.

"Wouldn't we be seeing this on the cover of every magazine if it were HRC?" questioned one campaign staffer, in an email obtained by the DRUDGE REPORT.

In December, the campaign asked one of its volunteer county coordinators in Iowa to step down after the person forwarded an e-mail falsely stating that Barack Obama is a Muslim.

Developing...

Whitewater: Years of Legal Trouble

Feb 24, 11:17 AM (ET)

By PETE YOST


WASHINGTON (AP) -

Whitewater. The word symbolizes years of legal troubles for Hillary Rodham Clinton during her husband's presidency. The scandal stoked a $52 million criminal investigation and offered moments of extraordinary spectacle, including the unprecedented grand jury appearance by a first lady.

"It's not a first that I'm particularly pleased about," she acknowledged at the time.

Today, Clinton factors the lessons of Whitewater into her campaign for the Democratic presidential nomination. "For 15 years, I have been the object of the Republican attack machine," she says. "And I'm still here."

What became the Whitewater saga grew out of a long-ago Arkansas land deal in which the Clintons said they lost money.

Rising political stars often find themselves standing at the intersection of business opportunities and friendship. Bill and Hillary Clinton were no exceptions.

When Bill Clinton was running for Arkansas governor in the late 1970s, they became partners with businessman Jim McDougal and his wife, Susan, in a planned vacation home development on the White River in the Ozarks.

The Clintons' Whitewater investment never would have created a stir if not for reports of fraud at the McDougals' savings and loan and a New York Times article about the Clintons and the McDougals during the 1992 presidential campaign.

That and the legal work Hillary Clinton did for the McDougals' financial institution were enough to send federal regulators scurrying to Little Rock, Ark.

Investigators began taking another look at the warehoused records of the McDougals' old S&L. Questions lingered:

_Had the McDougals taken money from their savings and loan to pay down the bank loans on Whitewater?

_In doing so, had they lightened the financial load on their partners, the Clintons?

A Hollywood producer would be hard-pressed to find a more colorful cast of characters than those mixing it up with the Clintons in the Whitewater deal.

Jim McDougal, in failing health and living in a trailer after regulators took away his S&L, remained the bombastic personality he had been in the days when he had money to burn. All he needed was an audience.

There always was one - the press, prosecutors, political pundits - during Whitewater. Not to mention Republicans feasting on the Clintons' legal problems.

Whitewater investigators are "going to hang" the Clintons, McDougal proclaimed from prison in 1997.

Prosecutors never nailed the Clintons, but they tried, from late 1993 to 2000. First the Justice Department. Then a specially appointed outside prosecutor. Then court-appointed Independent Counsel Ken Starr.

An assortment of controversies were tacked on, one by one, to the initial probe by Starr, a prominent Washington lawyer and a conservative. His conservative credentials were seized on by Clinton loyalists who decried Starr's inquiry as politically motivated.

Hillary Clinton's role in firing employees in the White House travel office also came under scrutiny. So did the gathering by some low-level White House aides of FBI background files on prominent Republicans.

Bill Clinton's alleged perjury and obstruction regarding his relationship with former White House intern Monica Lewinsky was added to the list. The Clinton-Lewinsky sex scandal captured the nation's attention for a year and led to his impeachment. The Senate acquitted him.

In the end, Jim McDougal died in prison. His ex-wife, imprisoned after refusing to testify against the Clintons, was pardoned by President Clinton on his last day in office in 2001.

The years of investigations left the Clintons with legal bills running into the millions.

Two years before the Lewinksy affair, prosecutors and a Republican-controlled Congress focused on the suicide of deputy White House counsel Vince Foster, a longtime law firm partner of Hillary Clinton.

Documents pertaining to Whitewater had been moved out of Foster's office by White House aides after his death. Were the records of Hillary Clinton's work for the McDougals' failing savings and loan among them? And where were the records now?

Her legal work for the S&L seemed minimal. But prosecutors could not be sure because they never could seem to find her time sheets documenting what services she had provided to McDougal.

The missing billing records became the Rosetta Stone of Whitewater. Congress wanted them, as did Starr's office.

Then one day in early January 1996, out popped the records from the White House family residence. The pile of computer printouts detailed her work for the McDougals' failing S&L in the mid-1980s. A Clinton staffer said she had found the printouts stashed in a box in a storage room.

Prosecutors were furious. They had issued a subpoena for the billing records 18 months earlier. The prosecutors summoned Hillary Clinton, making her the only first lady to appear before a federal grand jury.

The billing records did not present a pretty picture regarding Hillary Clinton. They showed that she drafted a real estate document regulators later said had misled bank examiners. Prosecutors concluded that McDougal and others had used her legal work to conceal unlawful activity.

Had she obstructed the investigation by hiding the billing records? Had the records been removed from Foster's office after his suicide? Neither prosecutors nor Congress were able to answer the questions.

She said she did not know where the billing records had been and that she could not recall the work she had done for the S&L 10 years earlier.

Prosecutors concluded they did not have enough to prove that she was a knowing participant in the criminal conduct by McDougal or others.

Starr's probe left a legacy of anger among congressional Democrats who saw Whitewater as an example of an out-of-control criminal investigation. Republicans, too, had endured a prolonged independent counsel investigation - Lawrence Walsh's probe into the Iran-Contra scandal. Congress put its foot down, declaring there would be no more independent counsels. So lawmakers allowed the law that authorized court-appointed prosecutors to lapse.

By the end of 2006, their legal bills paid off, the former president and his presidency-seeking wife had assets of at least $10 million and possibly as much as $50 million with no liabilities.

http://www.newsday.com/news/nationworld/ny...440,print.story



................But there is a little-known episode Clinton doesn't mention in her standard campaign speech in which those two principles collided. In 1975, a 27-year-old Hillary Rodham, acting as a court-appointed attorney, attacked the credibility of a 12-year-old girl in mounting an aggressive defense for an indigent client accused of rape in Arkansas - using her child development background to help the defendant.

The case offers a glimpse into the way Clinton deals with crisis. Her approach, then and now, was to immerse herself in even unpleasant tasks with a will to win, an attitude captured in one of her favorite aphorisms: "Bloom where you're planted."

It also came at a crucial moment in her personal life, less than a year after she followed boyfriend Bill Clinton down to Arkansas - a time when she struggled to gain a foothold in a new state while maintaining her own professional identity.

"Bill was out front," said Tim Tarvin, one of Rodham's student assistants at the University of Arkansas Law School legal aid clinic. "But Hillary was running just as hard behind the scenes, battling just as hard for acceptance."

In May 1975, Washington County prosecutor Mahlon Gibson called Rodham, who had taken over the law clinic months earlier, to tell her she'd been appointed to represent a hard-drinking factory worker named Thomas Alfred Taylor, who had requested a female attorney.

In her 2003 autobiography "Living History," Clinton writes that she initially balked at the assignment, but eventually secured a lenient plea deal for Taylor after a New York-based forensics expert she hired "cast doubt on the evidentiary value of semen and blood samples collected by the sheriff's office."

However, that account leaves out a significant aspect of her defense strategy - attempting to impugn the credibility of the victim, according to a Newsday examination of court and investigative files and interviews with witnesses, law enforcement officials and the victim.

Rodham, records show, questioned the sixth grader's honesty and claimed she had made false accusations in the past. She implied that the girl often fantasized and sought out "older men" like Taylor, according to a July 1975 affidavit signed "Hillary D. Rodham" in compact cursive.

Echoing legal experts, Clinton spokesman Howard Wolfson says the senator would have been committing professional misconduct if she hadn't given Taylor the best defense possible.

"As she wrote in her book, 'Living History,' Senator Clinton was appointed by the Circuit Court of Washington County, Arkansas to represent Mr. Taylor in this matter," he said. "As an attorney and an officer of the court, she had an ethical and legal obligation to defend him to the fullest extent of the law. To act otherwise would have constituted a breach of her professional responsibilities."

Seen as an aggressive defense................

Obama campaign attracting disenchanted Republicans
http://www.statesman.com/news/content/news...5obamacans.html

Ronald Reagan had his "Reagan Democrats." And now, Illinois Sen. Barack Obama has turned the tables on the Republican Party with his "Obamacans," disaffected Republicans who are flocking to the Democratic presidential candidate the way disenchanted Democrats backed Reagan, though in smaller numbers.

And in the March 4 Texas Democratic presidential primary, which is open to Republicans, Obamacans could be out in force. An Obamacan Web site, www.republicansforobama.org, already has a petition drive under way to line up Republicans for Obama in Texas.

Former Marine Jack Holt, a technology businessman from Austin who has supported President Bush and Arizona Sen. John McCain in the past with his votes and money, is so taken with Obama that he's close to taking the final step, from lifelong Republican to Democrat.

"You could say I'm just about there," Holt, 44, said Friday as he organized a weekend three-mile run/walk fundraising event in Austin for Obama.

"For me, the Republican Party has become so ugly and so arrogant, I don't want to have any part of it," he said.

Terror trial starting for ex-Navy sailor

Associated Press, by John Christofferson


2/25/2008 10:31:18 AM

NEW HAVEN, Conn. - The trial of a former Navy sailor accused of communicating with suspected terrorists and leaking information that could have doomed his own ship was set to open in a federal courtroom Monday. His defense was prepared to describe government's case as weak. Hassan Abu-Jihaad, 32, has pleaded not guilty to charges he provided material support to terrorists with intent to kill U.S. citizens and disclosed classified information relating to the national defense. If convicted, he faces up to 25 years in prison.

25/2/2008

Desinformación
Diario de América <-----Here


Who is Barack Obama?

Europe loves him, rich college kids faint before him and Chris Matthews, an American liberal TV commentator wets his pants over him.

Who is Barack Obama and how could so many people be fooled by this radical and dangerous man?

Obama has achieved something that some people thought not even God could do.

Por Peter Turner
Diario de América <----Here

Europe loves him, rich college kids faint before him and Chris Matthews, an American liberal TV commentator wets his pants over him. Who is Barack Obama and how could so many people be fooled by this radical and dangerous man?

Many far superior conservative writers have speculated that Obama’s fans are the bastard children of the Clinton’s “do what feel’s good” 90’s. The self-centered children of the dot.com anything goes, failure is success, stupid is smart, bad is good, left-speak generation has come home to roost. Who is paying the price for this new generation of sheeple (sheep + people), none other than the Village collectivist superintendent, Hillary Rodham Clinton. These Obamabrats were supposed to be her children but something strange happened on the way to the Coronation. The children had all grown up and the results were not pretty. Hillary is paying now but will the country also pay a high price later?

Change. The most overused word in the English language in this election year has been the rallying cry for Obama, Hillary and even some Republicans. No one can define change unfortunately, least of all Barack Obama, although the change Hillary or McCain propose is at least a known. Mr. Obama waxes poetically about change but never discusses what that change may be, the cost involved and who will lose. There is always a winner and a loser when it comes to change. In Zimbabwe when Robert Mugabe expropriated lands, the indigenous people of that country were expected to be the beneficiaries of this “agrarian reform.” The idea was to punish descendents of Imperialist nations for the benefit of the oppressed masses. Only one part of change was successful. The farmers lost their homes, livelihoods and homeland. The result is that Zimbabwe has more inflation than Germany did after WWI and that people are starving and the country must import food. Similar change is now showing up in Venezuela where it is cheaper and also necessary to import food than to manufacturer it. Another success story called “change.”

The little we do know about Obama’s change is that it will cost a lot of money and that he will reinvent international diplomacy. In addition to sitting down with all of our enemies without pre-condition, Obama has stated that he will invade Pakistan, an ally of the United States. At the same time, he will surrender Iraq to Al Qaeda and focus on the real war, Afghanistan. Afghanistan became the real war to liberals when we went into Iraq. Before Iraq, liberals were declaring Afghanistan a quagmire like Vietnam and demanding our withdrawal. Somehow, leaving Iraq and allowing millions to die is the ethical thing to do in liberal “think” tanks. I guess since liberals let millions die in Africa during the Clinton years what’s another couple of million lives.

Obama has achieved something that some people thought not even God could do. He has Republicans saying they would prefer Hillary Clinton to Obama. If the Democrats are to win in 2008, as many pundits say they will, then many Republicans (not all) are saying Hillary would be the lesser of two evils.

Hillary Clinton has been the anti-Christ to Republicans since,…..since she first stepped into the White House. Hillary has abused power dating back to the FBI file scandals, the White House firings, her Healthcare Star Chamber amid other scandals. There is no love lost between Hillary and Republicans so it should be a warning to Democrats that Hillary is seen as the more palatable choice for President. Although many pundits assume that Hillary would be easier to beat in the general election, I am not convinced. Hillary and McCain are not that different politically. Both believe in Global Warming and signing economically debilitating treaties, both believe in Amnesty, both pander to populist propaganda against “corporations,” both refuse to find new energy resources in US territory, although new resources from Brazil, Cuba, or Norway are somehow environmentally acceptable. Both Hillary and McCain also would defend the US and their interests and I am not convinced that Barack Obama would.

Regardless of your stance on the Iraq war and the reasons for getting in, Hillary will not pull a Zapatero and leave Iraq no matter what she is promising now. Hillary is smart enough to know that such a power vacuum would eventually lead to mass killings unlike anything we have seen in modern times and that we would eventually need to go back in. Obama has cornered himself into a position where anything less than absolute surrender in Iraq would be unacceptable to his flock of Manson-like followers. Even if Obama wanted to stay in Iraq, he won’t be able to unless he betrays the “change” he has preached. Barack tied his hands to a surrender policy much like Zapatero of Spain when it was politically easy to do so, when there was carnage every day on TV. Now things have changed in terms of violence and progress, even politically, though the left wing New York Times, Nancy Pelosi and Harry Reid refuse to acknowledge it.

Obama has a radical past and hides it by talking in religious platitudes about peace, change, hope, yada yada. If not for pacifists and “useless idiots” in the American and worldwide Progressive movement, perhaps millions of lives might have been spared in the 20th century. Have we learned nothing from failed Presidencies such as Carter’s? Much of today’s radical Islam really took hold under the Carter years. Barack Obama would be Carter on Red Bull. While making strategically dangerous decisions abroad, Obama would cripple this country economically with restrictive Socialist programs that have been estimated at nearly one trillion dollars. Where would the money come from? Would a President Obama get the money from higher taxes or by dismembering the military? Would Obama disable our missile defense system just as it is coming to successful fruition? Would Obama try to unilaterally disarm our nuclear capability just as Iran is coming into their own capability? Would Obama defend Israel, Taiwan or even Europe from their enemies? I want to know the answers and no one is asking the questions. If it comes down to getting the Devil we know in Hillary or the Devil we don’t with Obama, hands down, my vote is with Hillary.





Suscríbase gratis a Diario de América

It's always a useful strategy to call people whom you're seeking to have change their minds about something or someone "useful idiots".

We got convenient idiots now too. I guess they aren't quite as useful.

We got davis and inyer...ain't nobody gonna ever be more useful.

Or less.