Okay, after looking up information and things here and there, I found out that George W. Bush's Grandpa was in the Nazi Army, and possibly his Grandpa's Brother and other relatives...
I do know that Bush's Dad was in the War of the Pacific, and his dad + W. Bush himself was in presidency, but dont u think it is kinda scary that his grandpa was in the Nazis????
Revenge <?>

I'll tell you what I find scary: that some people believe that Papa Bush fought for the Nazis.

There is however some evidence that he did do some sort of business with Nazis and/or their sympathisers... http://www.guardian.co.uk/usa/story/0,12271,1312540,00.html
although the anti-diffamation league said no-go, at the time. Also, I don't know if the Guardian is a trusted source. I'm not sure which British papers are trustworthy.

Here is another statement on it. I also know nothing about this particular hipster's trustworthiness. http://www.straightdope.com/columns/030214.html

And here is fox news, for good measure. http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,100474,00.html

The Guardian is certainly more trustworthy than the Alex Jones type websites. But The Guardian is most certainly biased, more so than Fox. The Guardian wrote letters to voters in Ohio trying to get them to vote for Kerry, so anyone saying they aren't biased is full of it. The Guardian has reporters who specialize in trying to dig up dirt and the 'evils' of the US.

However, I will give them credit with this statement from the article:

There has been a steady internet chatter about the "Bush/Nazi" connection, much of it inaccurate and unfair.

George Bush's grandfather, the late US senator Prescott Bush, was a director and shareholder of companies that profited from their involvement with the financial backers of Nazi Germany.
Translation: He owned stock in a German Company.

what German company to be specific?, BMW? lol

BMW, Jaegermeister, MAN AG, does it matter?

Judging by his grandson's business history, probably the Zeppelin company :-D.

(JK, of course)

Bush's paternal grandfather was an American businessman who had some dealings with German companies during the Nazi era. He was later a US senator, which shows how seriously people viewed this. He was never in the Nazi army and whoever said that doesn't know what he's talking about.

Bush's maternal grandfather, Marvin Pierce, was president of McCall publications, and there's never been any allegations at all about him. His wife did die in an auto accident in 1949 when he was driving, but the key word here is accident. He was a relative of Franklin Pierce, one of the worst Presidents ever. Of course, he's also an ancestor of George W. Bush, which is even more embarassing.

dont u think it is kinda scary that his grandpa was in the Nazis????

No - even if it's true, why would it be scary? Bush's grandfather doesn't hold any position of power.

The Guardian is certainly more trustworthy than the Alex Jones type websites. But The Guardian is most certainly biased, more so than Fox. The Guardian wrote letters to voters in Ohio trying to get them to vote for Kerry, so anyone saying they aren't biased is full of it.

Actually this is not true. The Guardian suggested to its readers to try to write to Ohio voters to ask them to vote for Kerry, and they were the ones who did so (amazingly unwisely, I thought at the time), not the paper itself. Bear in mind that virtually all British people loathe Bush no matter what their own political affiliation, but Guardian readers loathe him even more. The Guardian is certainly left-of-centre, though whether that makes it "biased" or not is a moot point. Personally of course I regard a left-wing news source as simply more truthful than right-wing ones, but that probably just reveals my own bias. However, the Guardian is certainly reliable, like all the "quality broadsheets", no matter where they fall on the political spectrum. For those who don't know, these include the Guardian and the Independent, which are left-wing, and the Telegraph, which is right-wing. The Times is also right-wing but is not such a good paper, being more tabloidy these days. Of the true tabloids, the Daily Mail and the Evening Standard are extremely right-wing and extremely nasty. The Sun is right-wing but in a mostly jolly sort of way, while the Mirror is broadly left-wing. These two are "red tops" which means they are more interested in sport and royals than in real news.

You should understand that, no matter how biased they may be in whatever direction, British papers virtually never actually make stuff up - they are just biased in what they report (and of course in their comments, which are meant to be biased anyway). The more working class their readership, the more likely they are to actually tell people what to do - thus the Sun and the Mirror instruct their readers how to vote (which is why Blair is so scared of Murdoch). The only papers that do tend to make things up are the Mail and the Standard, which like to make scurrilous predictions, mostly about Ken Livingstone, that turn out to be complete lies, but are presumably not actionable because they were only predictions.

The Guardian has reporters who specialize in trying to dig up dirt and the 'evils' of the US.

Which reporters are those? After twenty years of reading the Guardian I don't think I've encountered them...

Not that im a bush supporter or anything, but why have you guys succumbed to the fallacy of association?

Prescott Bush traded with the Nazis, so did IBM. Not anything new.

only one person has succombed to the fallacy of association in this thread.

Got some infos on Prescott and present Bush's father in their dealings amongst United States and German elites.

http://www.tarpley.net/bushb.htm

a brief excerpts from Chapter 2 "Hitler Project:
Bush Property Seized--Trading with the Enemy

In October 1942, ten months after entering World War II, America was preparing its first assault against Nazi military forces. Prescott Bush was managing partner of Brown Brothers Harriman. His 18-year-old son George, the future U.S. President, had just begun training to become a naval pilot. On Oct. 20, 1942, the U.S. government ordered the seizure of Nazi German banking operations in New York City which were being conducted by Prescott Bush.

Under the Trading with the Enemy Act, the government took over the Union Banking Corporation, in which Bush was a director. The U.S. Alien Property Custodian seized Union Banking Corp.'s stock shares, all of which were owned by Prescott Bush, E. Roland `` Bunny '' Harriman, three Nazi executives, and two other associates of Bush.@s1

The order seizing the bank `` vests '' (seizes) `` all of the capital stock of Union Banking Corporation, a New York corporation, '' and names the holders of its shares as:

`` E. Roland Harriman--3991 shares ''
[chairman and director of Union Banking Corp. (UBC); this is `` Bunny '' Harriman, described by Prescott Bush as a place holder who didn't get much into banking affairs; Prescott managed his personal investments]

`` Cornelis Lievense--4 shares ''
[president and director of UBC; New York resident banking functionary for the Nazis]

`` Harold D. Pennington--1 share ''
[treasurer and director of UBC; an office manager employed by Bush at Brown Brothers Harriman]

`` Ray Morris--1 share ''


[director of UBC; partner of Bush and the Harrimans]

`` Prescott S. Bush--1 share ''
[director of UBC, which was co-founded and sponsored by his father-in-law George Walker; senior managing partner for E. Roland Harriman and Averell Harriman]

`` H.J. Kouwenhoven--1 share ''
[director of UBC; organized UBC as the emissary of Fritz Thyssen in negotiations with George Walker and Averell Harriman; managing director of UBC's Netherlands affiliate under Nazi occupation; industrial executive in Nazi Germany; director and chief foreign financial executive of the German Steel Trust]

`` Johann G. Groeninger--1 share ''
[director of UBC and of its Netherlands affiliate; industrial executive in Nazi Germany]

`` all of which shares are held for the benefit of ... members of the Thyssen family, [and] is property of nationals ... of a designated enemy country.... ''

By Oct. 26, 1942, U.S. troops were under way for North Africa. On Oct. 28, the government issued orders seizing two Nazi front organizations run by the Bush-Harriman bank: the Holland-American Trading Corporation and the Seamless Steel Equipment Corporation.@s2

U.S. forces landed under fire near Algiers on Nov. 8, 1942; heavy combat raged throughout November. Nazi interests in the Silesian-American Corporation, long managed by Prescott Bush and his father-in-law George Herbert Walker, were seized under the Trading with the Enemy Act on Nov. 17, 1942. In this action, the government announced that it was seizing only the Nazi interests, leaving the Nazis' U.S. partners to carry on the business.@s3

These and other actions taken by the U.S. government in wartime were, tragically, too little and too late. President Bush's family had already played a central role in financing and arming Adolf Hitler for his takeover of Germany; in financing and managing the buildup of Nazi war industries for the conquest of Europe and war against the U.S.A.; and in the development of Nazi genocide theories and racial propaganda, with their well-known results.

The facts presented here must be known, and their implications reflected upon, for a proper understanding of President George Herbert Walker Bush and of the danger to mankind that he represents. The President's family fortune was largely a result of the Hitler project. The powerful Anglo-American family associations, which later boosted him into the Central Intelligence Agency and up to the White House, were his father's partners in the Hitler project.

President Franklin Roosevelt's Alien Property Custodian, Leo T. Crowley, signed Vesting Order Number 248 seizing the property of Prescott Bush under the Trading with the Enemy Act. The order, published in obscure government record books and kept out of the news,@s4 explained nothing about the Nazis involved; only that the Union Banking Corporation was run for the `` Thyssen family '' of `` Germany and/or Hungary ''--`` nationals ... of a designated enemy country. ''

By deciding that Prescott Bush and the other directors of the Union Banking Corp. were legally front men for the Nazis, the government avoided the more important historical issue: In what way were Hitler's Nazis themselves hired, armed and instructed by the New York and London clique of which Prescott Bush was an executive manager? Let us examine the Harriman-Bush Hitler project from the 1920s until it was partially broken up, to seek an answer for that question.

Hey, lets use something that is somewhat fact-checked, WIKIPEDIA~!

Harriman Bank was the main Wall Street connection for German companies and the varied U.S. financial interests of Fritz Thyssen, who had been an early financial backer of the Nazi party until 1938, but who by 1939 had fled Germany and was bitterly denouncing Hitler. Business transactions for profit with Nazi Germany were not illegal when Hitler declared war on the US, but, six days after the attack on Pearl Harbor, President Franklin Delano Roosevelt signed the Trading With the Enemy Act after it had been made public that U.S. companies were doing business with the declared enemy of the United States.

Stop the conspiracy theories, please

There is no need for conspiricy theories to sex-up this story.

Trading with the Nazi's was immoral long before it was illegial under US law.

Not really fair to judge a man by his grandfather's actions, though if it were my grandfather I would be ashamed.

There is no need for conspiricy theories to sex-up this story.

Trading with the Nazi's was immoral long before it was illegial under US law.

Not really fair to judge a man by his grandfather's actions, though if it were my grandfather I would be ashamed.

Why was it immoral before it was illegal under US law?

There is no need for conspiricy theories to sex-up this story.

Trading with the Nazi's was immoral long before it was illegial under US law.

He owned stock in a german bank for christsakes. Thats not aiding the Nazis in anyway, nor is it being complicit in their crimes in the least.

Why was it immoral before it was illegal under US law?

Prior to the US joining the war it was evident (esp to those intimately involved with them) that the Nazi's were a bunch of psychos.

The trading law was passed in Oct of '42, four years after the Kristallnacht and almost a decade after the first iterations of the concentration camps. Before the Americans even joined the war people understood what we now term to be genocide to be taking place. People were shocked at the scale, the calculation and the effiency but they had been aware the Nazi's were killing the Jews, Politicals, Gipsies etc on mass for years. I guess both sets of my grandparents were involved in the war in ways that gave them access to intellegence but it was hardly a national seceret.

I say selling such people anything that might aid such actions makes you an accessory to genocide, not to mention scum and a sh1t of the first order.

I dont see that the legality of such actions in anyway bares upon it morality. Even if I dont believe in god I hope there is one to punish war-profiteers who abet genocide.

As I say there is no call to judge a man by the actions of his grandparents, but Im bloody glad mine equited themselves as honerably as they did.

Prior to the US joining the war it was evident (esp to those intimately involved with them) that the Nazi's were a bunch of psychos.

The trading law was passed in Oct of '42, four years after the Kristallnacht and almost a decade after the first iterations of the concentration camps. Before the Americans even joined the war people understood what we now term to be genocide to be taking place. People were shocked at the scale, the calculation and the effiency but they had been aware the Nazi's were killing the Jews, Politicals, Gipsies etc on mass for years. I guess both sets of my grandparents were involved in the war in ways that gave them access to intellegence but it was hardly a national seceret.

I say selling such people anything that might aid such actions makes you an accessory to genocide, not to mention scum and a sh1t of the first order.

I dont see that the legality of such actions in anyway bares upon it morality. Even if I dont believe in god I hope there is one to punish war-profiteers who abet genocide.

As I say there is no call to judge a man by the actions of his grandparents, but Im bloody glad mine equited themselves as honerably as they did.

Except it wasn't known genocide was taking place in Germany. And it wasn't widely believed until allied forces actually liberated the concentration camps. As for the Nazis being psychos. It was well known that the Germans were aggressively expansionist... much like Britain, France, Russia, the United States, etc had been at various points in their histories.

Except it wasn't known genocide was taking place in Germany. And it wasn't widely believed until allied forces actually liberated the concentration camps. As for the Nazis being psychos. It was well known that the Germans were aggressively expansionist... much like Britain, France, Russia, the United States, etc had been at various points in their histories.

In '41 my grandmother was translating German shipping's unencrypted communications. She maintained it was clear from the transmitions she was listening to that mass killing as going on. What shocked her particually was that this was transmitted in clear and that that the mass deaths were incendental to the point of the communications - eg cargo dying in the holds, must urgently dock as adverse weather expected. I wish I could remember the exact line, it was some thing about "many dying, some birthing" or somesuch. I'll ask my old man.

The Nazi's hadnt kicked off the hard-core death camps, but everyone knew they were mass-murders. I know the Nazi's being known to be evil prior christmass 41/2 doesnt fit into the moral narrative hollywood wishes to impose on the war, but there we are.

I have some great grandparents & that that fought for both the Nazi's and the Soviets. I am neither. Did they support any of the beliefs or actions of either nation? I don't know off hand, but I do know that they looked out for what was best for their family, so they went along with one army or another to protect their family from persecution.

Another of my relatives were one of the constables that protected the Prussian Royal Court (according to a few of my relatives on my fathers side).

Every man (or woman) is in control of his own destiny, others can influence it, but it is ultimately his own.

Just because you have relatives that fought for nations or causes that were eventually deemed evil, that doesn't mean that you will be evil.

Tank Guy my grandfather also fought in the german army during ww2. I would also like to state that the german empire employed the draft. Is he a nazi no. was he a nazi I don't no. Probaly not if he knew wat was going one. Most germans were completely brainwashed and shouldn't be held accountable for their support of nazism.

In '41 my grandmother was translating German shipping's unencrypted communications. She maintained it was clear from the transmitions she was listening to that mass killing as going on. What shocked her particually was that this was transmitted in clear and that that the mass deaths were incendental to the point of the communications - eg cargo dying in the holds, must urgently dock as adverse weather expected. I wish I could remember the exact line, it was some thing about "many dying, some birthing" or somesuch. I'll ask my old man.

The Nazi's hadnt kicked off the hard-core death camps, but everyone knew they were mass-murders. I know the Nazi's being known to be evil prior christmass 41/2 doesnt fit into the moral narrative hollywood wishes to impose on the war, but there we are.

Your grandmother may have known but that does not mean it was common knowledge or even if it was believed. I doubt the average American citizen had access to decrypted German communications.


Edit: After searching wikipedia (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Holocaust#Who_knew_about_the_killings.3F):
On December 17, 1942, however, after receiving a detailed eyewitness account from Jan Karski, the Allies issued a formal declaration confirming and condemning Nazi extermination policy toward the Jews.

People shouldn't have needed confirmation of genocide to know that the Nazis were a bad lot. Their racist and antisemitic policies throughout the 1930s, and indeed those contained in Hitler's book published in the 1920s, ought to have made it clear that these were not nice people, even if they hadn't yet set up the death camps.

People shouldn't have needed confirmation of genocide to know that the Nazis were a bad lot. Their racist and antisemitic policies throughout the 1930s, and indeed those contained in Hitler's book published in the 1920s, ought to have made it clear that these were not nice people, even if they hadn't yet set up the death camps.

Again, I don't disagree but how was the known actions of Germany pre-1942 significantly worse that that of other countries? I have never heard that it was morally wrong to trade with Britain around the time of Second Boer War ~40 years prior or that it was morally wrong to trade with the United States or Confederate states during the American Civil War. Saying it was morally wrong to trade with Nazi Germany antebellum is a ridiculous double standard even with 20-20 hindsight.

Again, I don't disagree but how was the known actions of Germany pre-1942 significantly worse that that of other countries? I have never heard that it was morally wrong to trade with Britain around the time of Second Boer War ~40 years prior or that it was morally wrong to trade with the United States or Confederate states during the American Civil War. Saying it was morally wrong to trade with Nazi Germany antebellum is a ridiculous double standard even with 20-20 hindsight.

But during the American Civil War, as is well known, workers in the Lancashire cotton industry did vote to support the Union, not the Confederacy, even though it was in their economic interests for the Confederacy to win and cotton shipments to resume. Their reason was that the Confederate stance on slavery was immoral. So there were certainly precedents for taking a moral stance like the one you describe.

Anyway, I didn't say that people shouldn't have traded with the Nazis before the Second World War. I simply said that they shouldn't have required evidence of genocide in order to know that the Nazis were immoral. It's other people who said that, having that knowledge, they shouldn't have traded with them.

But during the American Civil War, as is well known, workers in the Lancashire cotton industry did vote to support the Union, not the Confederacy, even though it was in their economic interests for the Confederacy to win and cotton shipments to resume. Their reason was that the Confederate stance on slavery was immoral. So there were certainly precedents for taking a moral stance like the one you describe.

Anyway, I didn't say that people shouldn't have traded with the Nazis before the Second World War. I simply said that they shouldn't have required evidence of genocide in order to know that the Nazis were immoral. It's other people who said that, having that knowledge, they shouldn't have traded with them.

Well I war replying mostly to those other people. I have nothing against calling people who traded with Nazi Germany immoral as long as everyone who did the same thing under similar circumstances are also labeled immoral. Just that this would mean that most everyone who traded are invested internationally throughout history were immoral.

Why does this all make me think of Schindler's List?

Of course it was immoral trading with nazists since they took power. But morality isnt good for capitalism:) And I personally think that average bussinesman from USA(or Mexico,..) had not much knowledge if in Germany are nazists or democrats. There were money and this was only aspect about his decisions.

Okay, after looking up information and things here and there, I found out that George W. Bush's Grandpa was in the Nazi Army, and possibly his Grandpa's Brother and other relatives...
I do know that Bush's Dad was in the War of the Pacific, and his dad + W. Bush himself was in presidency, but dont u think it is kinda scary that his grandpa was in the Nazis????

So?

Revenge <?>

What?

Prior to the US joining the war it was evident (esp to those intimately involved with them) that the Nazi's were a bunch of psychos.

The trading law was passed in Oct of '42, four years after the Kristallnacht and almost a decade after the first iterations of the concentration camps. Before the Americans even joined the war people understood what we now term to be genocide to be taking place. People were shocked at the scale, the calculation and the effiency but they had been aware the Nazi's were killing the Jews, Politicals, Gipsies etc on mass for years. I guess both sets of my grandparents were involved in the war in ways that gave them access to intellegence but it was hardly a national seceret.

I say selling such people anything that might aid such actions makes you an accessory to genocide, not to mention scum and a sh1t of the first order.

I dont see that the legality of such actions in anyway bares upon it morality. Even if I dont believe in god I hope there is one to punish war-profiteers who abet genocide.

As I say there is no call to judge a man by the actions of his grandparents, but Im bloody glad mine equited themselves as honerably as they did.
Thats all well and good, but owning stock in a German Bank has nothing to do with any of that. In fact, if he had sold the stock, it probably would have served the Nazis just as well because it would probably go to Hermann Goering or some such figure.
I wonder if you would have such outcry if he had owned stock in a French company, considering the Vichy's involvment in the holocaust, maybe keeping stock in a French bank would be a crime as well?
What about the hundreds of companies that traded with Germany before and after the war? Does buying German steel make you guilty of being involved with the Nazis? What about drinking Heiniken? Doesn't this make Poland complicit in the holocaust for having a trade agreement with the Nazis?

What?

What I meant is that, maybe Bush is capable of revenge since his grandpa was in nazis and stuff, and if he is out for revenge, that would explain why he is doin a sucky job at bein a president (Srry if I offended anyone, Im just sayin)

Bush is capable of revenge because his grandpa was in nazis?

You mean, that the Nazis' revenge against the American people is to force them to freely elect a mediocre president 60 years after the fall of the Third Reich?

Nazi science sneers at logical fallacies!

Irregular Webcomic FTW!

It is never Irregular Webcomic not FTW.

Revenge against whom? What's he on about?

Is there any purpose to this thread any more?

If this thread is about to be closed I would like to reiterate (since people have quoted me a lot) that however I may view the morality of trading with the Nazi's I said the man should be judged on his actions, not those of his grandfather.

...I said the man should be judged on his actions, not those of his grandfather.

Of course.

Interesting to see that nobody wants to deify the man just because his dad was a decorated WWII pilot against the Axis powers. Why, then, should we tar him for his grandfather's business decisions?

Of course.

Interesting to see that nobody wants to deify the man just because his dad was a decorated WWII pilot against the Axis powers. Why, then, should we tar him for his grandfather's business decisions?

There is no need for conspiricy theories to sex-up this story.

Trading with the Nazi's was immoral long before it was illegial under US law.

Not really fair to judge a man by his grandfather's actions, though if it were my grandfather I would be ashamed.

I never sought to paint the man with his forefathers brush. My point was that people trying to sex-up the story to "Bush's family in Nazi's" was unnecessary. It was immoral to trade with the Nazi's, which his grandfather did, but that he should not be judged by his granfathers actions.

I judge the man by his own actions, and none too kindly for that. His fathers actions were laudable an his grandfathers were shameful, but they were not his own.

I'm not even getting into a debate with people justifying how trading with the Nazi's was just fine. If they cannot see right from wrong more fool them. Personally the people who fought for their country I dont see any immorality in that action. Those who stood to the side and profitted from the war aiding the Nazi's from choice or greed, well, I take a dimmer view of their actions.

You still haven't shown how the Nazis were in any way involved in this bank, or in any way benefitted from it.

You still haven't shown how the Nazis were in any way involved in this bank, or in any way benefitted from it.

... 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.

Ten chars.

So, your back peddling. This bank is no longer important to the Nazis, but it has dealings with companies that do have dealings with the Nazis, on a previous occassion.

That sir, is called playing five degrees of seperation. I can do that to prove that anyone is responsible for aiding the Nazis.

Is his grandfather still alive BTW?

We don't have much to fear from his grandfather, but if he is...

:scared:

Bush's stupid, and maybe greedy sometimes, but not that evil...

So, your back peddling. This bank is no longer important to the Nazis, but it has dealings with companies that do have dealings with the Nazis, on a previous occassion.

I find it hard to believe you have actually read the article. I've not changed my position a jot and your comments are completely irrelivant to both my comments and the article.

I understand you want to have a pop at me, but please read the article and address some of the actual points raised.

Is his grandfather still alive BTW?

We don't have much to fear from his grandfather, but if he is...

:scared:

Bush's stupid, and maybe greedy sometimes, but not that evil...

Bush's grandfather's been dead since the seventies. He'd be going on 112 if he'd taken better care of himself.

I have. Prescot Bush owned stock in a Banking company along with Fritz Thyssen, a German industrialist who made large contributions to the NDSAP in the late 20s and early 30s, but by 1938 was a critic of the regime and had resigned from government in disgust, and by 1939, had fled to exhile in Switzerland.
The argument is that Bush retroactively aided the Nazis by having dealings with someone who made contributions to the Nazi party previously. That entire argument is based on Bunk.
The company was created to manage Thyssen's assets in america, and was an american company. The government seized these assets, in 1942, and actually gave them back to Thyssen after the war. I've never seen such an issue created out of nothing.