23-01-2018, 07:59 PM
Thanks for the question posed by David Lewis about Nelson Rockefeller. I did read some excerpts from your link of THE NAZI HYDRA. I saw that the author believed that Rocky would be prosecuted by FDR.
My assessment of Rocky is based on my reading of the book called Thy Will Be Done: The Conquest of the Amazon: Nelson Rockefeller and Evangelism in the Age of Oil by Gerard Colby which was referred to me by a publisher. Another book which I read on the subject is Trading With The Enemy by Charles Higham. I would recommend the Higham book more the the Colby book.
The hidden reality in all the "trading with the enemy" issue is that the US and the UK wanted to help Nazi Germany to keep them in the War long enough so that the Nazis and the Russians would pretty much destroy each other so that we could then come in and pick up the pieces. There was also a pro-fascist element in the person of John J. McCloy. McCloy was Assistant Secretary of the Army and he refused to authorize bombing of I G Farben synthetic oil facilities. Corporate people believed (rightly) that just because there was a War, that didn't mean you could afford to destroy the entire corporate infrastructure that took 100 years to create and then start all over again after only a four year (really a one year, 1944-1945) War.
Churchill ordered that Standard Oil and other oil company ships would be allowed to pass through the British blockade. I don't think Churchill was pro-fascist.
Regarding Rocky, it's a two-sided coin. On the one hand, Rocky was put in charge of intelligence in South America because he had much in common with all the fascist dictators and fascist corporate interests in South America. Rocky knew all their tricks. As head of South American intel in the War, Rocky was apparently a sort of "double agent" operating in between Roosevelt and South American fascists. I don't believe Rocky was ANTI-FASCIST really. I would describe him more as AGNOSTIC on the issue of fascism.
It is true that Rocky was the one who got the country of Brazil to declare war on Nazi Germany and Brazil actually sent troops into North Africa in WWII. But it is also true that Rocky begged for "amnesty" for fascist Argentina and Juan Peron, i.e. forgive and forget about Argentinian fascism as the War was ending.
It is my impression that the Rockefeller interests would finance anybody, Communist OR fascist. I think (I'm not positive) that Fletcher Prouty in his book stated the the Chase Manhattan bank had a branch office in Moscow while Lenin ruled Russia. His point was that the Chase Manhattan was operating at a level way above the battle between fascism, democracy, Communism and so on.
My only point in absolving Rocky is that if you had to pick one Rockefeller to give the go-ahead for the assassination (or turn a blind eye), that it seems like David Rockefeller has a WAY WORSE reputation among conspiracy theorists than the other Rockefellers. But I really haven't nailed that down in my own mind by any means. To do that would require me to read (1) a book called The Rockefeller Inheritance which is the definitive work on the family, and (2) read a biography for each of the brothers to see what was driving their personalities.
Another major point is the relationship between The Institute of Pacific Relations and the right-wing extreme McCarthyite congressional committees. The details of this battle have been hidden away and covered up, but from a distance this battle looks like Senator James O. Eastland (and his openly pro-fascist allies like Senator Pat McCarran) vs. Anglophile Dean Rusk and the Rockefeller interests.
At this point, analyzing the Rockefellers just isn't a high priority for me compared to reading about Otto Skorzeny, Gestapo chief Heinrich Muller, Operation Valkyrie and other directly related topics regarding my theory of the JFK case.
James Lateeer
My assessment of Rocky is based on my reading of the book called Thy Will Be Done: The Conquest of the Amazon: Nelson Rockefeller and Evangelism in the Age of Oil by Gerard Colby which was referred to me by a publisher. Another book which I read on the subject is Trading With The Enemy by Charles Higham. I would recommend the Higham book more the the Colby book.
The hidden reality in all the "trading with the enemy" issue is that the US and the UK wanted to help Nazi Germany to keep them in the War long enough so that the Nazis and the Russians would pretty much destroy each other so that we could then come in and pick up the pieces. There was also a pro-fascist element in the person of John J. McCloy. McCloy was Assistant Secretary of the Army and he refused to authorize bombing of I G Farben synthetic oil facilities. Corporate people believed (rightly) that just because there was a War, that didn't mean you could afford to destroy the entire corporate infrastructure that took 100 years to create and then start all over again after only a four year (really a one year, 1944-1945) War.
Churchill ordered that Standard Oil and other oil company ships would be allowed to pass through the British blockade. I don't think Churchill was pro-fascist.
Regarding Rocky, it's a two-sided coin. On the one hand, Rocky was put in charge of intelligence in South America because he had much in common with all the fascist dictators and fascist corporate interests in South America. Rocky knew all their tricks. As head of South American intel in the War, Rocky was apparently a sort of "double agent" operating in between Roosevelt and South American fascists. I don't believe Rocky was ANTI-FASCIST really. I would describe him more as AGNOSTIC on the issue of fascism.
It is true that Rocky was the one who got the country of Brazil to declare war on Nazi Germany and Brazil actually sent troops into North Africa in WWII. But it is also true that Rocky begged for "amnesty" for fascist Argentina and Juan Peron, i.e. forgive and forget about Argentinian fascism as the War was ending.
It is my impression that the Rockefeller interests would finance anybody, Communist OR fascist. I think (I'm not positive) that Fletcher Prouty in his book stated the the Chase Manhattan bank had a branch office in Moscow while Lenin ruled Russia. His point was that the Chase Manhattan was operating at a level way above the battle between fascism, democracy, Communism and so on.
My only point in absolving Rocky is that if you had to pick one Rockefeller to give the go-ahead for the assassination (or turn a blind eye), that it seems like David Rockefeller has a WAY WORSE reputation among conspiracy theorists than the other Rockefellers. But I really haven't nailed that down in my own mind by any means. To do that would require me to read (1) a book called The Rockefeller Inheritance which is the definitive work on the family, and (2) read a biography for each of the brothers to see what was driving their personalities.
Another major point is the relationship between The Institute of Pacific Relations and the right-wing extreme McCarthyite congressional committees. The details of this battle have been hidden away and covered up, but from a distance this battle looks like Senator James O. Eastland (and his openly pro-fascist allies like Senator Pat McCarran) vs. Anglophile Dean Rusk and the Rockefeller interests.
At this point, analyzing the Rockefellers just isn't a high priority for me compared to reading about Otto Skorzeny, Gestapo chief Heinrich Muller, Operation Valkyrie and other directly related topics regarding my theory of the JFK case.
James Lateeer