A WEEKLY COMMENTARY
Year Twenty-Nine ... Number Thirty-Nine ... October 8, 1982
THE LEGALIZED CRIME OF BLACKMAILING UNCLE SAM
Most of us have known it for years. But it's always important to have more proof, because this often serves to awaken more sleepers and lethargics in our society. We refer to a dispatch out of Munich via UPI which states that U.S. bankers aided Hitler in his rise to power and in the establishment of Naziism in Germany. There has been much convincing evidence to prove that Bolshevism would never have succeeded had it not been for the lavish financial aid given Lenin and Trotsky by German, English and American based international Bankers, when those two with their handfuls of followers were able to invade Russian and gain control of its government. Nor would Stalin and his despotic successors have been able to keep Communism alive in the USSR and spread its evil system over a third of the world, had it not been for the financial aid given them (and is still being given them) by those same International Bankers. As for the rise of Hitler and Nazism, the following UPI dispatch was published in a few U.S. newspapers on or about September 25, 1982. We quote from the dispatch as published in the San Jose (CA) Mercury News of that date:
U.S. Bankers Aided Hitler, Book Claims
Munich, West Germany (UPI) - A publishing firm claimed Friday to have discovered a book that alleges American bankers supplied Adolf Hitler with millions of dollars to help build up his Nazi party. Droemer Knaur publishers said they received a copy of the book from a Dutch doctor and were convinced that it was authentic. They said the book, written by the late U.S. banker Sidney Warburg, disappeared during the war. Warburg, a joint owner of the New York bank Kuhn Loeb and Cie, described in the book three conversations he held with Hitler at the request of American financiers, the Bank of England and oil firms to facilitate payments to the Nazi party, the publishers said.
The book alleged that Hitler received $1 million from Kuhn Loeb and Cie during 1929, further payments of $15 million in 1931, and $7 million when Hitler took power in 1933, the publishers said. They said Warburg described himself in the book as the "Cowardly instrument" of his American banking colleagues for having arranged deals with Hitler.
The book was originally published in Holland in 1933, shortly before Warburg's death, but disappeared during the war after its translator and publisher were murdered, the publisher's spokesman said. He said it was thought the Nazis carried out the murders and destroyed the copies of the book to avoid being discredited. The book will be republished in Dec. 1 under the title "How Hitler Was Financed," he said (End of Dispatch)
It should be understood that the Megabankers did not finance Hitler because of their love, either of Hitler or of the kind of National Socialism he was promoting. It was necessary that there be a World War II. Hitler and his followers in Germany which still writhed under the awful reparations demanded as a result of its loss of World War I, were the perfect instrument for starting such a war. This would be a war that would destroy all the former Empires, especially the British Empire, and create in their place two strong antagonists: Capitalist USA and Communist USSR. Between the cold wars, containments, detentes, nuclear freezes and other controversial issues that could be manufactured, the New World Order would slowly emerge, with the two giants -- USA and USSR -- finally merging into the desired One World Government. Or so the World Power Brokers hoped. And so they seem to be accomplishing. The term "Capitalist USA" has been uniquely appropriate. As Communism has advanced, America has provided the capital to make such advancement possible. Lately some of this "capitalization of communism" has become quite evident.
Lately there has been voiced considerable fear of the possibility that some foreign governments which are heavily indebted to the Megabankers as well as to the "Trilateral" Nations, might go bankrupt, default on their debts and thus cause a potential worldwide economic crisis that might seriously endanger the Megabankers as well as the "Trilateral" governments. There was the case of Communist Poland, which came close to such an act and was rescued at the last minute by the Central Banks of the "Trilateral" Nations. Then came the case of Mexico, also on the verge of default. David Rockefeller explained how such a thing would never happen. In an interview published in the current (10/11/82) U.S. News, the U.S. Chairman of the Trilateral Commission, Chairman of the Board of the Council on Foreign Relations, economic adviser to the Reagan Administration, head of the Chase Manhattan Bank, International Advisory Committee, etc., admits that foreign governments might default on their debts and create certain difficulties, but this would be very unlikely. Because "the nations being mentioned today (as being advanced) are different from those mentioned a few years ago. Then people were talking about Zaire and Peru and Turkey. Banks didn't lose money on loans to these countries, as was expected. Actually, in all three cases, the banks are making out reasonably well. Today, we are talking about different names. Mexico is one. But I don't see any likeliohod of default. I think that what will happen there, just as it did in Turkey, is that the banks that extend credit will get together with Mexican officials, the International Monetary Fund and the World Bank and work out a program. It may be a stretchout of the debt rather than paying it exactly as planned. Nobody likes to be paid later than was planned. But that isn't the end of the world." (Unquote)
******************************************************
THE UPRIGHT OSTRICH ON THE UPCOMING ELECTIONS
******************************************************
Truck or Treat? The for-real question for all of us comes two days later this year, at the voting booths November 2. And many of the figures demanding your decision are more artfully masked and shrouded in a symbolic sense than the troops of little ones begging handouts at Hallowe'en. October must be a month of heavy homework for all UPRIGHT Patriots wishing freedom and justice for their posterity. A Big Spenders sweep at the polls will consolidate the Welfare Fascism that has brought us to the present crisis, and perhaps doom a free market and our Constitutional Republic for uncountable ages. Reaganomics, never implemented as promoted during electioneering two years ago, has been exposed as a monetarist boon for the megabank monopolists. A more urgent question is the Reagan-Ethics (that of campaign rhetoric and TV speeches) failed? Was it as sham? Essentially, the Trick or Treat problem facing you at the polls is the follow:
Are the United States still a federated Republic under a constitution granted by WE THE PEOPLE for the Rule of LAW? Or has this nation become a Totalitarian State under the arbitrary Rule of Despotic Men?
All victorious candidates, whatever their speechifying, must take an Oath to UPHOLD OUR CONSTITUTION. For decades, however, our tax-paid servants, elected as well as appointed, have been in wanton violation of that oath. ... We are convinced that Restoration and Enforcement of our Constitution is the key to ALL of our problems....
Beyond determining who are the sincere Constitutionalists among candidates, our voting suggestions are mostly negative. Above all, vote against all those treacherous turkeys who voted for the latest tax Swindle, which Rep. Ron Paul rightly called a "bummer." (Vote for Ron Paul)... Vote against those Turkeys who betrayed us with the Panama Payaway. .. If it's a choice between the lesser of two evils, or questionables, vote against lawyers. VALOOO! (Vote ALL Lawyers Out Of Office!) The Ostrich would like to see lawyers barred from serving in legislatures, state and federal; it's conflict of interest. If the choice is between incumbent and newcomer, vote against the incumbent. No matter how initially UPRIGHT, most of our elected public servants seem to become afflicted with Potomac corruption, and the longer in Washington, the worse the disease. And many catch contagion in state capitals. If both choices are so evil you gag, write in a vote. For Thomas Jefferson, or Benjamin Franklin, or Donald Duck, or the Upright Ostrich. Such a vote at least does register protest.
State level, as well as congressional candidates should be pinned down on the Liberty Amendment and on the spreading initiative for abolishing the Federal Reserve. ... Candidates at all levels should be queried about their position on Gun Control. (From The Upright Ostrich, Vol. I, Number 9, October 1982. P.O.Box 10787, Ft. Lauderdale, Florida 33310. Yearly: $25. Article slightly edited for purpose of continuously).
******************************************************
In other words, the International Agencies and the Central Banks will "work out a program" so that Megabankers have little worry about lending and lending to governments that can never repay; there are "banks of last resort" that will pick up the burden. In most cases, those "banks of last resort" are the ones that are being financed by the U.S. Government, through its Central Bank (the Federal Reserve) or through one of the government's regionalized Import-Export Banks.
What actually happened in the case of Mexico was mentioned by David Rockefeller, but he didn't tell how it was done. Or exactly why. As one advisor noted: "In Mexico, seventy years of socialism is finally bearing its fruit, as the world's largest debtor nation moves to bankruptcy, exchange controls, nationalization of its banking system, and economic and social upheaval. Looking very much like pre-revolutionary Iran in 1977, Mexico could experience a revolution and communist dictatorship before the end of 1983." So, the time was ripe to take control over Mexico and at the same time allow the country to go socialist, or communist if that's the way the ball bounced. As David Rockefeller said, there's nothing wrong with trading with Communist Nations. After all, the Chase Manhattan's most important branch bank outside the United States is located in Red Square in Moscow.
But back to the Mexican caper. The first thing was a demand on the part of the Federal Reserve that the Mexican banks be nationalized. The reason for this goes back to that Monetary Control Act of 1980 which gave the Fed the power to print money with which to purchase debts from foreign countries, so long as the debts were guaranteed by the respective government. This had been the case with Poland, which had to prove itself to be a government in its own right (sans Soviet occupation), and then had to guarantee its national banks. After that, loans were extended, new loans arranged. Much the same had to happen in the case of Mexico. However, in this settlement, which was mentioned by David Rockefeller in his interview with U.S. News, something new and unprecendented in world banking circles was added. Among the various deals concluded, an emergency loan was made to Mexico by the Basel-based Bank for International Settlements (BIS). BIS is older than the UN, the IMF, or the World Bank. It was established by the Central Bankers in 1930 to take care of the upcoming German reparations settlements that were made during and after World War II. BIS later became a kind of superexclusive headquarters and meeting place for representatives of some 30 of the world's major Central Banks, including all of the Trilateral Nations. Just about any country can become a member of the IMF, and a few of the Soviet satellite countries have done so, in order to qualify for special loans and grants (grants are loans that are not expected to be repaid). But the BIS is a more exclusive Big Banker's Club, and those marked as debtor nations don't belong. The unprecedented action: a financial package was put together by the Central Banks of twelve BIS member nations: Belgium, Britian, Canada, France, Italy, Japan, the Netherlands, Sweden, West Germany, Switzerland, Spain and the United States - with the United States providing half of the total amount. This pooled loan was then made, by the BIS, to Mexico. This kind of a world pool may be the way in which the Central Banks will organize to form their upcoming World Bank, thus by-passing the IMF which, like the UN, has sort of been taken over by the so-called Third World debtor nations. The "Society of the Elect" doesn't relish large memberships and non-productive hangers-on.
Anyway, now that Mexico has been re-financed and is well on the way toward becoming a totalitarian socialist state (with the aid of the Trilats), now comes the question of Cuba, which is anxious to be supported by the United States, while still serving the Communist cause. As we have indicated in previous reports, there have been conferences between Cuban and American officials, and much groundwork has been laid toward relieving the USSR of another of its financial burdens (as we did with Poland) and having us take on the job of financing Cuba directly. Ambler H. Moss, Jr. who just resigned in August after four years as a ranking U.S. Ambassador to Panama, previously served as a diplomat in Havana, Cuba. Presently an adjunct professor at the University of Miami's Center for Advanced International Studies, Moss wrote the following, which appeared in the Miami Herland of Oct. 3:
"Should the United States change its relations with Fidel Castro's Cuba? We are once again hearing expressions of what could be called, depending upon one's point of view, exhortations to creative thinking or dangerously naive misconceptions concerning U.S. policy toward Cuba. In a recent article, Wayne Smith, former ranking U.S. diplomat in Havana, is reported as scoring the Reagan Administration for rejecting serious peace overtures by Castro (Sept. 5). In another article, syndicated columnist Gary Wills goes so far as to suggest that the United States could detach Cuba from the Soviet Union if our government merely chose to do so (Sept. 22)."
Ambassador Moss is totally against any idea of accepting Cuba as a dependent and ally of the United States. His reasons are sound. But Moss is just a retired ambassador, not an agent of the communications media, and so far as we know is in no way connected with the Eastern Establishment. And the media power has been turned on. Columns and articles are to be written to soften up the American attitude toward Castro and Cuba, so that Cuba can be "saved from default" by the Federal Reserve or some affiliate of our Central Bank.
In an article appearing in the September 1982 Issue of Speak Up a conservative Canadian monthly, "The Mortgaging of a Revolution" is discussed by Ernesto F. Betancourt and Wilson P. Dizard III. They point out that: "The dependency of Fidel Castro's government on Western banks is fast approaching a crisis state. In 1982 Cuba's debt was 58 times what it was in 1959. If the Soviet debt were added, Cuba's debt of almost $10 billion is more than 200 times what it was in 1959 ... The financial difficulties of the Castro government are highlighted by two political factors. First, Poland's large rescheduled debt has recently focused attention on the overall Soviet bloc commercial debt. Yet, Cuba's debt situation is one of the worst within the Soviet bloc ... Second, Cuba's bank debt grew largely during the latter half of the 1970s -- a time of renewed Cuban support for international violence and actual deployment of thousands of troops and civilian abroad... Cuba has launched an aggressive campaign to refinance its debt and promote foreign investment. Central to this campaign is a public relations blitz to lift the U.S. trade embargo... In summary, present funding sources for Cuba's failing economy are drying up. The well orchestrated propaganda campaign on rapproachment with Havana seems to be an effort to have U.S. banks and investors close the gap left by other Western banks. The ultimate goal of this effort is to secure government insured U.S. investment in Cuba, thereby saddling the U.S. taxpayer with the responsibility for the Cuban debt -- as in the recent Polish rescheduling. Cuba may even try to rejoin the IMF and the World Bank as part of a package deal." (Unquote). So, if the Power Brokers have their way, we'll be financing the upkeep of that Soviet military base in the Caribbean.
Extra copies of this Newsletter: 1 copy: 25 cents, 10 copies: $1.50, 20 copies: $3.00, 30 copies: $4.50, 40 copies: $6.00, 50 copies: $7.50, 100 copies: $10.00. More than 100 copies: 10 cents each. Please include extra if 1st class postage is desired. Subscription rates: $24 per year. Foreign airmail: $30 per year. DON BELL REPORTS Weekly, emphasizing the Christian American point of view. Address all orders: DON BELL REPORTS, P.O. BOX 2223, PALM BEACH, FLORIDA 33480