• NEW! LOWEST RATES EVER -- SUPPORT THE SHOW AND ENJOY THE VERY BEST PREMIUM PARACAST EXPERIENCE! Welcome to The Paracast+, eight years young! For a low subscription fee, you can download the ad-free version of The Paracast and the exclusive, member-only, After The Paracast bonus podcast, featuring color commentary, exclusive interviews, the continuation of interviews that began on the main episode of The Paracast. We also offer lifetime memberships! Flash! Take advantage of our lowest rates ever! Act now! It's easier than ever to susbcribe! You can sign up right here!

    Subscribe to The Paracast Newsletter!

Ten Year Anniversary Of the Disclosure Project

Free episodes:

maxwell

for entertainment purposes only
There's a conspiracy. It has survived for at least these last ten years.

In 2001 The Con desperately needed a Major Distraction -- because the Disclosure Project threatened to expose their most terrible secret -- the secret of the Fourth Reich, the secret of Allied collusion and treason with Nazis.

The secrets of the Bush family, in short -- the family that had not too long before stolen a Presidential election from Al Gore and American Democratic voters.



The many Army, Navy, Air Force and USMC personnel who were part of the Disclosure Project press Club meeting of May, 2001 were DANGEROUS to the Bush Family conspiracy.


...that deceased patriarch and National Socialist sympathizer -- treasoner and betrayer of the United States and the Allies
Prescott Bush had been a Nazi sympathizer had been denied and covered up by George W. and his father George H. W. --

...but the Disclosure Project was DAMAGING to that secret carefully kept since the "end" of the Second World war
. (Was it not?)
nazibush.gif

http://tarpley.net/online-books/george-bush-the-unauthorized-biography/chapter-2-the-hitler-project/ Chapter 2 – The Hitler Project


[Translate]
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.
How important was the Nazi enterprise for which President Bush’s father was the New York banker?
The 1942 U.S. government investigative report said that Bush’s Nazi-front bank was an interlocking concern with the Vereinigte Stahlwerke (United Steel Works Corporation or German Steel Trust) led by Fritz Thyssen and his two brothers. After the war, Congressional investigators probed the Thyssen interests, Union Banking Corp. and related Nazi units. The investigation showed that the Vereinigte Stahlwerke had produced the following approximate proportions of total German national output:
<dl><dd>50.8% of Nazi Germany’s pig iron
41.4% of Nazi Germany’s universal plate
36.0% of Nazi Germany’s heavy plate
38.5% of Nazi Germany’s galvanized sheet
45.5% of Nazi Germany’s pipes and tubes
22.1% of Nazi Germany’s wire
35.0% of Nazi Germany’s explosives.@s8 </dd></dl> Prescott Bush became vice president of W.A. Harriman & Co. in 1926. That same year, a friend of Harriman and Bush set up a giant new organization for their client Fritz Thyssen, prime sponsor of politician Adolf Hitler. The new German Steel Trust, Germany’s largest industrial corporation, was organized in 1926 by Wall Street banker Clarence Dillon. Dillon was the old comrade of Prescott Bush’s father Sam Bush from the “ Merchants of Death ” bureau in World War I.


Not a word was REALLY SAID about Nazi betrayal at the Disclosure Project Press Club meeting of May, 2001. the huge danger to the conspiracy was that the Nazi treason was the actual reason to DENY all other allegations. (note: watch as guilt ridden morons rush forward to deny all the hidden truths stored here.)


In 2001 May Osama bin Laden had yet to become famous as the enemy of the United States, humanity and freedom that he became notorious as. The Disclosure Project disclosed yes, extraterrestrrial existance -- but even more dangerously it opened the door to the idea of the Fourth Reich --


Operation Paperclip, also, even though disclosed -- being a heavy secret. if a fact is declassified but MOST PEOPLE think that they "know" the truth...Operation Paperclip was the codename under which the US intelligence and military services extricated scientists from Germany, during and after the final stages of World War II. The project was originally called Operation Overcast, and is sometimes also known as Project Paperclip.

Of particular interest were scientists specialising in aerodynamics and rocketry (such as those involved in the V-1 and V-2 projects), chemical weapons, chemical reaction technology and medicine. These scientists and their families were secretly brought to the United States, without State Department review and approval; their service for Hitler's Third Reich, NSDAP and SS memberships as well as the classification of many as war criminals or security threats also disqualified them from officially obtaining visas. An aim of the operation was capturing equipment before the Soviets came in. The US Army destroyed some of the German equipment to prevent it from being captured by the advancing Soviet Army.

The majority of the scientists, numbering almost 500, were deployed at White Sands Proving Ground, New Mexico, Fort Bliss, Texas and Huntsville, Alabama to work on guided missile and ballistic missile technology. This in turn led to the foundation of NASA and the US ICBM program.


...a truth that is in opposition to the facts...

then The Con has worked -- but it is in DANGER and needs to shore itself up.

Ten years have passed and now Osama bin Laden is dead, probably. What is left? A shadow government, all the military-andustrial System Lords of the Bush Nazi team, scurrying behind the facade of Barack Obama desperately waging war on many fronts and manipulating opinion. Conspiracies within conspiracies at a level of complexity that has defined most people's attempts to understand -- a great work of deception of Diabolical, Crowleyan proportions.

Which was what they wanted...
 
Webster Tarpley - Lyndon LaRouche groupie. That explains where you get all your nutty ideas.

It must be quite scary for you, living in a world full of conspiracies, shadow governments, computer geeks, and Nazis...and people who you denigrate as stupid. You, who cannot spell or even write a coherent sentence.

Pffff. You're not annoying, you're just another crazy person on the internet.
 
a) what do YOU know, and why are you even HERE if you're so FUCKING smart?
just to be NEGATIVE and contribute DENIAL? people like you are WAY CHEAPER than a dime a dozen

what could you POSSIBLY have to offer? how do i know you are just not some frustrated NAZI REPUBLICAN who is lying LIKE BUSH LIED FOR YEARS to keep a secret?

i severely DOUBT that you possess the mental acumen for real dialogue.

also, if you talked to me like that ON THE STREET? game over.

maybe shoving your opinion in your personal TOILET AREA would help
in your future weak-minded PISSINGS.

thanks!


maxwell


SubSite - Start

"Bob" said "Fuck'Em If They Can't Take A Joke!"


i despise larouche btw
 
Hmm...it takes lot for me to suggest banning someone but...
Seconded. He's had his fun, we've had our fun, enough. He'll probably take it as a badge of honor seeing as how he likes to brag about how he's gotten himself banned from other places. I don't see him getting any better.
 
Hmm...it takes lot for me to suggest banning someone but...
Seconded. He's had his fun, we've had our fun, enough. He'll probably take it as a badge of honor seeing as how he likes to brag about how he's gotten himself banned from other places. I don't see him getting any better.
Settle down boys. His initial post was ok, whether you agree with any of it or not. Responding to a negative and probably uncalled for reply to that post doesn't constitute banning otherwise both of you, as well as myself, would have been banned eons ago. Think about it:)
 
Hmm...it takes lot for me to suggest banning someone but...

As I.......But this time I will make a serious exception!

---------- Post added at 09:01 PM ---------- Previous post was at 08:56 PM ----------

Settle down boys. His initial post was ok, whether you agree with any of it or not. Responding to a negative and probably uncalled for reply to that post doesn't constitute banning otherwise both of you, as well as myself, would have been banned eons ago. Think about it:)

Pair,

There is a way to reply to posts, and then there is the use of profanity and other forms of smear tactics. This is uncalled for and I disagree with you, although I do understand what you are attempting to do (peacekeeping). Sometimes you must call a spade a spade though, and this type of trash, albeit OK in the original, was definitely banning material in the reply.
 
As I.......But this time I will make a serious exception!

---------- Post added at 09:01 PM ---------- Previous post was at 08:56 PM ----------



Pair,

There is a way to reply to posts, and then there is the use of profanity and other forms of smear tactics. This is uncalled for and I disagree with you, although I do understand what you are attempting to do (peacekeeping). Sometimes you must call a spade a spade though, and this type of trash, albeit OK in the original, was definitely banning material in the reply.


What a joke, this from the guy who asked Angelo to ban me, and uses profanity and smears when someone disagrees with you.

People in glass houses........................
 
There is a way to reply to posts, and then there is the use of profanity and other forms of smear tactics. This is uncalled for and I disagree with you, although I do understand what you are attempting to do (peacekeeping). Sometimes you must call a spade a spade though, and this type of trash, albeit OK in the original, was definitely banning material in the reply.
Ok but his reply was hardly over laden with profanity. And remember he was replying to an obviously inflammatory reply to his original post. A reply that was entirely about ridiculing him. We don't have to agree with Max's OPINION in regards to his original post but surely he is entitled to post the same as indeed we all are even you and me.
As for peace keeping, i'm not sure that was what i was doing. I'm just not a fan of banishment as such, especially for such minor offenses. Hell i even disagreed with the call to ban Lance when that was on the table.:)
I have seen much worse responses to posts in my time here.

---------- Post added at 10:49 AM ---------- Previous post was at 10:46 AM ----------

People in glass houses........................
................I agree.
 
Ok but his reply was hardly over laden with profanity. And remember he was replying to an obviously inflammatory reply to his original post. A reply that was entirely about ridiculing him. We don't have to agree with Max's OPINION in regards to his original post but surely he is entitled to post the same as indeed we all are even you and me.
As for peace keeping, i'm not sure that was what i was doing. I'm just not a fan of banishment as such, especially for such minor offenses. Hell i even disagreed with the call to ban Lance when that was on the table.:)
I have seen much worse responses to posts in my time here.


Thank you Pair for clarifying that for me. It was my mistake to have seen only his latest reply and not the initial reply made to his post.

I appreciate you taking the time to explain the matter.
 
Actually the full gestalt of the thing can only be understood if you saw the multiple threads full of wacky nonsense that all appeared at once. But hey, if those kind of comments are the ones that certain people value then party on!
Lance
Crikey, I wasn't aware that posting "wacky nonsense" was an offense, Lance. So are you saying that maxwell and anyone else who post multiple threads of "wacky nonsense" should be banned? And of course because those who disagree with banishment are the "certain people" you mention aren't they? And it goes without saying that we must totally agree with everything that max says as well then.
 
And here is his original rant:

an annoying point from a new member

He came in flaming and posting numerous vitriolic comments. My comment to him on this thread was a result of being fed up with, not his ideas (though I still think they are incoherent), but with the manner in which he posted them. I do not think my response was inflammatory, considering the context.

And I thought his reply was predictable and funny. But hey, what does a Nazi Republican know?:p

Sorry if I offended those who thought I was out of bounds, but I stand by my comments as the grumpy old lady I am.
 
And here is his original rant:

an annoying point from a new member

He came in flaming and posting numerous vitriolic comments. My comment to him on this thread was a result of being fed up with, not his ideas (though I still think they are incoherent), but with the manner in which he posted them. I do not think my response was inflammatory, considering the context.

And I thought his reply was predictable and funny. But hey, what does a Nazi Republican know?:p

Sorry if I offended those who thought I was out of bounds, but I stand by my comments as the grumpy old lady I am.

You certainly didn't upset me and you weren't out of bounds with your reply either. I was just pointing out to some that his response was framed around your post to him which, rightly or wrongly was ridiculing him. Did he deserve that ridicule? Possibly/probably. If you were annoyed by it then ...yes!:)
I'm sure you could care less about the nature of his reply or that he replied at all for that matter. I am also sure that you expected him to reply in that way. You have the right to reply to his stuff any way you want as far as i'm concerned:) As was he. The point being i think some are too eager to call for banishment.
He may well have a complete meltdown with his next post and if the mods decide to, then i'm sure they will ban him. I have every faith in Gene, Chris, Ron and Angelo to handle him accordingly.
 
Crikey, I wasn't aware that posting "wacky nonsense" was an offense, Lance. So are you saying that maxwell and anyone else who post multiple threads of "wacky nonsense" should be banned? And of course because those who disagree with banishment are the "certain people" you mention aren't they? And it goes without saying that we must totally agree with everything that max says as well then.

I can't speak for Lance Pair, but let me ask you a fair question. Do you think that this gentleman or lady posted the material to have an honest discussion of it's content, or to have received the exact type of reaction we all seemed to have given him or her, based on the nonsensical dribble which was presented?

The reason why I asked is because the content is in and of itself pretty far out there and I noticed that immediately after it was replied to, albeit in a way that came across to the author as a direct attack, he or she couldn't wait to reply with a vindictive re-torte in kind.

In conclusion to this, and please note I am probably being more rhetorical than inquisitive, I was so quick to jump on the bandwagon because I severely detest trolls and it seemed by the poster's numbers and demeanor, that it was nothing more than thus.
 
If it weren't for useless posts full of idiotic nonsense and the inevitable sarcastic, profanity ridden replies, this would be a much smaller place. And a hell of a lot more interesting place to visit. Oh well, you have to let the cretins and the kooks have their say, just like you have to let stupid people vote. It makes us all poorer and dumber than we should be, but the alternatives are worse.

::Sigh::
 
I can't speak for Lance Pair, but let me ask you a fair question. Do you think that this gentleman or lady posted the material to have an honest discussion of it's content, or to have received the exact type of reaction we all seemed to have given him or her, based on the nonsensical dribble which was presented?

The reason why I asked is because the content is in and of itself pretty far out there and I noticed that immediately after it was replied to, albeit in a way that came across to the author as a direct attack, he or she couldn't wait to reply with a vindictive re-torte in kind.

In conclusion to this, and please note I am probably being more rhetorical than inquisitive, I was so quick to jump on the bandwagon because I severely detest trolls and it seemed by the poster's numbers and demeanor, that it was nothing more than thus.

A troll, by nature, only survives if others respond to the trolling attempt. And i have been guilty in the past of responding myself. The content of which he was posting has been seen here before many times and should not come as a surprise to veteran forumites that occasionally that kind of stuff turns up. At least maxwell has an interesting writing style, although appearing to be written on the fly from a phone.
To answer your question, yes i think he wrote hoping to get exactly the response he got.
 
I don't know if Maxwell is a troll here to send us up or just a little further out on the limb than most of us. Time usually tells. If he has genuine points to make, they would be much better served up on a smaller platter. That's just the way forums work.
 
... the phrase "lest we forget" is supposed to remind us never to let it happen again, but there are still those who foolishly glorify it.

Over the years in my historical studies and my work on World War Two Armour for a Museum Curator, I was privileged to know many Veterans on both sides of the theater, and honestly, glorifying war itself is a terrible thing, but glorifying those who sacrificed what they believed in for a cause, such as the United States Naval Personnel (and every group in the military for that matter) who laid down their lives so we could be free today to speak of it, isn't. I feel that every one of those men I spoke with, and even those that I only heard of, will always have a very special place in my heart....and as they did what they were told because they truly believed they were doing the right thing, deserve respect, remembrance, and honor in everyone's heart who takes advantage of that very same freedom today.
 
I've seen most of them. They seem pretty tame to me. Nothing to get wound up over though. I'm sure the mods are keeping an eye on him.

I'm definitely keeping an eye on him. I'm confident that most posters here are smart enough to see what his posts are. I try not to ban people that don't post SPAM. The insults are not cool though and I'll be taking care of that.
 
Back
Top