Daily Kos

The Real Plot to Overthrow FDR's America

Sun Feb 27, 2005 at 08:29:36 AM PDT

[Preliminary Note: Some of you may wonder about the relevance of this diary, but trust me, by the end you'll see how it all ties in with our present day situation.]

Time for a trip in the way-back machine to recall a bit of history of which most of us have never heard.  Last year, Phillip Roth had a bestseller with his novel, The Plot Against America, a fictionalized alternative history involving a fascist plot to take over the government of the USA and turn it into a fascist state under President Charles Lindbergh.  But how many of you know of the real plot to overthrow FDR during the early years of his administration, a plot conceived by rich industrialists and bankers concerned that Roosevelt was about to conduct a massive redistribution of wealth?  

More after the fold . . .

It's a sordid tale of fascist intrigue by some of America's most famous corporate and political families (including members of FDR's own party) which was deliberately covered up by both the only Congressional Committee to investigate the plot, and also by the leading media outlets of the day including the New York Times.  And the truly scary part is that the plot might very well have succeeded if not for the bravery of a single, progressive leader: Marine General, Smedley Butler.

The life of Smedley Butler is an uniquely American story.  A decorated soldier (he was awarded the Congressional Medal of Honor twice) and warrior who ascended through the ranks to become one of the most admired soldiers of his era, he also grew to deeply despise war, and to distrust the reasons he had been sent to fight in distant places.  As he stated himself in a speech he gave on August 21, 1931 to an American Legion convention in New Britain, Connecticut:

"I spent 33 years...being a high-class muscle man for Big Business, for Wall Street and the bankers. In short, I was a racketeer for capitalism....

"I helped purify Nicaragua for the international banking house of Brown Brothers in 1909-1912. I helped make Mexico and especially Tampico safe for American oil interests in 1916. I brought light to the Dominican Republic for American sugar interests in 1916. I helped make Haiti and Cuba a decent place for the National City [Bank] boys to collect revenue in. I helped in the rape of half a dozen Central American republics for the benefit of Wall Street....

"In China in 1927 I helped see to it that Standard Oil went its way unmolested....I had...a swell racket. I was rewarded with honors, medals, promotions....I might have given Al Capone a few hints. The best he could do was to operate a racket in three cities. The Marines operated on three continents..."

Fortunately for those of us living today, the people he condemned in that speech must not have been aware of his beliefs, or if they were they must have told themselves he didn't mean what he said, because they selected him to be the leader of a military coup attempt by which they meant to supplant Roosevelt as President in all but name.  These plotters represented

some of America's richest and most famous names of the time:

    * Irenee Du Pont - Right-wing chemical industrialist and founder of the American Liberty League, the organization assigned to execute the plot.
    * Grayson Murphy - Director of Goodyear, Bethlehem Steel and a group of J.P. Morgan banks.
    * William Doyle - Former state commander of the American Legion and a central plotter of the coup.
    * John Davis - Former Democratic presidential candidate and a senior attorney for J.P. Morgan.
    * Al Smith - Roosevelt's bitter political foe from New York. Smith was a former governor of New York and a co-director of the American Liberty League.
    * John J. Raskob - A high-ranking Du Pont officer and a former chairman of the Democratic Party. In later decades, Raskob would become a "Knight of Malta," a Roman Catholic Religious Order with a high percentage of CIA spies, including CIA Directors William Casey, William Colby and John McCone.
    * Robert Clark - One of Wall Street's richest bankers and stockbrokers.
    * Gerald MacGuire - Bond salesman for Clark, and a former commander of the Connecticut American Legion. MacGuire was the key recruiter to General Butler.

They chose MacGuire as the point man to approach Butler with their proposal.  The plot would be funded by Dupont and Morgan money funneled through an organization they had recently created to oppose Roosevelt, the  American Liberty League.  (The League was funded by donations from US Steel, General Motors, Chase Manhattan Bank, Standard Oil, Goodyear and the Dupont family, among others.  Not surprisingly, the League would later actively oppose almost every major piece of New Deal legislation, including, but not limited too Social Security).

Butler was supposed to be the "famous name" who would recruit an army of out of work war  veterans to march on Washington.  It was thought that his popularity with the troops would make it easy for him to rally them to the cause of supplanting Roosevelt as the effective head of government.  As proposed,

[T]hey wanted General Butler to deliver an ultimatum to Roosevelt. Roosevelt would pretend to become sick and incapacitated from his polio, and allow a newly created cabinet officer, a "Secretary of General Affairs," to run things in his stead. The secretary, of course, would be carrying out the orders of Wall Street. If Roosevelt refused, then General Butler would force him out with an army of 500,000 war veterans from the American Legion. But MacGuire assured Butler the cover story would work:

      "You know the American people will swallow that. We have got the newspapers. We will start a campaign that the President's health is failing. Everyone can tell that by looking at him, and the dumb American people will fall for it in a second..."

The businessmen also promised that money was no object: Clark told Butler that he would spend half his $60 million fortune to save the other half.

And what type of government would replace Roosevelt's New Deal? MacGuire was perfectly candid to Paul French, a reporter friend of General Butler's:

      "We need a fascist government in this country... to save the nation from the communists who want to tear it down and wreck all that we have built in America. The only men who have the patriotism to do it are the soldiers, and Smedley Butler is the ideal leader. He could organize a million men overnight."

Indeed, it turns out that MacGuire travelled to Italy to study Mussolini's fascist state, and came away mightily impressed. He wrote glowing reports back to his boss, Robert Clark, suggesting that they implement the same thing.

The plot collapsed when Butler went public in late 1934 and exposed the conspiracy.  The General revealed the details of the coup attempt in sworn testimony before the  "McCormack-Dickstein" Committee (the predecessor of the soon to be infamous "House Un-American Affairs Committee":

This House committee was named after its chairman and vice chairman, John W. McCormack and Samuel Dickstein. It was called the Special Committee on Un-American Activities Authorized to Investigate Nazi Propaganda and Certain Other Propaganda Activities. In 1934, it held public and private hearings in six cities, questioned hundreds of witnesses and collected testimony filling 4,300 pages. Its mandate was to get "information on how foreign subversive propaganda entered the U.S. and the organizations that were spreading it."
           

The committee did investigate Butler's claims, and subpoenaed witnesses, including MacGuire, Butler's main contact with the plotters.  Initially,

MacGuire, not surprisingly, denied that such a plot existed. Instead, he claimed his activities had been political lobbying to preserve the gold standard, but he quickly destroyed his credibility as a witness by giving contradictory testimony. While the final report agreed with Butler that there was evidence of a coup d'état plot against Roosevelt, no further action was taken on it. The Committee's authority to subpoena witnesses expired at the end of 1934, and the Justice Department started no criminal investigation.

So why, after concluding that the plot did indeed exist was no one prosecuted?  Why were principals of the plot never even required to testify?  It's hard to say at this far remove.  Certainly it wasn't because the individuals behind the coup attempt abandoned all hope of future success, as this letter, dated 1936, from William Dodd, the U.S. Ambassador to Germany, to President Roosevelt makes clear:

"A clique of U.S. industrialists is hell-bent to bring a fascist state to supplant our democratic government and is working closely with the fascist regime in Germany and Italy. I have had plenty of opportunity in my post in Berlin to witness how close some of our American ruling families are to the Nazi regime.... A prominent executive of one of the largest corporations, told me point blank that he would be ready to take definite action to bring fascism into America if President Roosevelt continued his progressive policies.  Certain American industrialists had a great deal to do with bringing fascist regimes into being in both Germany and Italy. They extended aid to help Fascism occupy the seat of power, and they are helping to keep it there. Propagandists for fascist groups try to dismiss the fascist scare. We should be aware of the symptoms. When industrialists ignore laws designed for social and economic progress they will seek recourse to a fascist state when the institutions of our government compel them to comply with the provisions."

Perhaps the naming of prominent Democrats, such as Al Smith and former Democratic Party Chairman Raskob, as members of the plot convinced the Roosevelt administration, not anxious to reveal dissent within its own ranks, to suppress the Committee report.  Perhaps MacGuire's untimely death from pneumonia shortly after he testified led the Department of Justice to back away from any investigation.  Or perhaps the wealth and influence of the plotters themselves was simply too great.  What is abundantly clear, however, is that the Committee report was suppressed.

Suppression by the [Committee] took the form of deleting extensive excerpts relating to Wall Street financiers including Guaranty Trust director Grayson Murphy, J.P. Morgan, the Du Pont interests, Remington Arms, and others allegedly involved in the plot attempt. Even today, in 1975, a full transcript of the hearings cannot be traced.

* * *

John L. Spivak, the reporter who unearthed the suppression in the Congressional transcripts, challenged Committee Co-chairman Samuel Dickstein of New York with his evidence. Dickstein admitted that:

    the Committee had deleted certain parts of the testimony because they were hearsay."
    "But your published reports are full of hearsay testimony."
    "They are?" he said.
    "Why wasn't Grayson Murphy called? Your Committee knew that Murphy's men are in the anti-Semitic espionage organization Order of '76?"
    "We didn't have the time. We'd have taken care of the Wall Street groups if we had the time. I would have no hesitation in going after the Morgans."
    "You had Belgrano, Commander of the American Legion, listed to testify. Why wasn't he examined?"
    "I don't know. Maybe you can get Mr. McCormack to explain that. I had nothing to do with it."

The fact remains that the committee did not call Grayson Murphy, Jackson Martindell, or John W. Davis, all directly accused in sworn testimony. Further, the committee deleted all portions of the testimony involving other prominent persons: J.P. Morgan, the Du Ponts, the Rockefeller interests, Hugh Johnson, and Franklin D. Roosevelt. When Congressman Dickstein pleaded his innocence to John Spivak, it was inconsistent with his own letter to President Roosevelt, in which he claims to have placed restrictions even upon public distribution of the committee hearings, as printed, "in order that they might not get into other than responsible hands."

The final report issued by the committee in February 15, 1935 buried the story even further. John L. Spivak sums up the burial succinctly: "I... studied the Committee's report. It gave six pages to the threat by Nazi agents operating in this country and eleven pages to the threat by communists. It gave one page to the plot to seize the Government and destroy our democratic system."

What was even more distressing (and eerily familiar to the our present situation) was not just  the failure of the press of that era to cover the story, but the active role they played in covering it up, even to the extent of scrubbing internal archives:

The role of leading newspapers and journals of opinion in reporting the Butler affair is equally suspect. In fact, their handling of the event has the appearance of outright distortion and censorship. The veracity of some major newspapers has been widely questioned in the last 50 years, and in some quarters the media have even been accused of a conspiracy to suppress "everything in opposition to the wishes of the interest served."

Does such suppression extend to major news journals? We can take two prime examples; The New York Times and Time magazine. If such a combination as Callaway charges did exist, then these two journals would certainly be among "25 of the greatest papers involved in the 1930s." The New York Times reporting of the "plot" opens up with a front-page headline article on November 21, 1934: "Gen. Butler Bares 'Fascist Plot' to Seize Government by Force," with the lead paragraph quoted above (p. 143). This Times article is a reasonably good job of reporting and includes a forthright statement by Congressman Dickstein: "From present indications Butler has the evidence. He's not going to make any serious charges unless he has something to back them up. We'll have men here with bigger names than his." Then the Times article records that "Mr. Dickstein said that about sixteen persons mentioned by General Butler to the Committee would be subpoenaed, and that a public hearing might be held next Monday." The Times also includes outright and sometimes enraged denials from Hugh Johnson, Thomas W. Lamont, and Grayson M-P. Murphy of Guaranty Trust.

The following morning, November 22, the Times made a major switch in reporting the plot. The disclosures were removed to an inside page, although the testimony now concerned Gerald MacGuire, one of the accused plotters. Further, a decided change in the attitude of the committee can be discerned. Congressman McCormack is now reported as saying that "the committee has not decided whether to call any additional witnesses. He said that the most important witness, aside from Mr. MacGuire, was Robert Sterling Clark, a wealthy New Yorker with offices in the Stock Exchange Building."

While the Times reporting was consigned to an inside single column, the editorial page, its most influential section, carried a lead editorial that set the tone for subsequent reporting. Under the head "Credulity Unlimited," it contended that the Butler charge was a "bald and unconvincing narrative. ... The whole story sounds like a gigantic hoax ... it does not merit serious discussion," and so on. In brief, before the 16 important witnesses were called, before the evidence was on the record, before the charge was investigated, the New York Times decided that it wanted to hear nothing about this story because it was a hoax, not fit to print.

The next day, November 23, the Times changed its reporting still further. The headlines were now about Reds and Red Union Strife and concerned alleged activities by communists in American trade unions, while the Butler testimony and the developing evidence were secreted deep within the reporting of Red activities. The resulting story was, of course, vague and confused, but it effectively buried the Butler evidence.

On November 26, the hearings continued, but the committee itself now had cold feet and issued a statement: "This Committee has had no evidence before it that would in the slightest degree warrant calling before it such men as John W. Davis, General Hugh Johnson, General James G. Harbord, Thomas W. Lamont, Admiral William S. Sims, or Hanford MacNider."

It should be noted that these names had come up in sworn testimony, later to be deleted from the official record.  The Times pursued its reporting of this development in abbreviated form on an inside page under the head, "Committee Calm over Butler 'Plot', Has No Evidence to Warrant Calling Johnson and Others." On November 27 the Times reporting declined to five column inches on an inside page under the ominous head "Butler Plot Inquiry Not To Be Dropped." The December hearings were reported by the Times on a front page (December 28 1934), but the plot was now twisted to "Reds Plot to Kidnap the President, Witness Charges at House Inquiry."

Reviewing the story of the Butler Affair in the Times 40 years after the event and comparing its story to the printed official testimony, itself heavily censored, it is obvious that the newspaper, either under its own initiative or under outside pressure, decided that the story was not to be made public. Consistent with this interpretation, we find that The New York Times, the "newspaper of record," omits the Butler testimony from entries in its annual index, depended upon by researchers and scholars. The Times Index for 1934 has an entry "BUTLER (Maj Gen), Smedley D," but lists only a few of his speeches and a biographic portrait. The Butler testimony is not listed. There is an entry, "See also: Fascism-U.S.," but under that cross-reference there is listed only: "Maj Gen S.D. Butler charges plot to overthrow present govt; Wall Street interests and G.P. MacGuire implicated at Cong com hearing." The only significant Wall Street name mentioned in the index is that of R.S. Clark, who is reported as "puzzled" by the charges. None of the key Morgan and Du Pont associates cited by General Butler is listed in the Index. In other words, there appears to have been a deliberate attempt by this newspaper to mislead historians.

       

Now it's true that this story hasn't been completely forgotten.  There are websites that discuss the conspiracy (some to which I've already linked, and others which I'll list at the conclusion of this diary), and a few people wrote books which at least mention the subject.  However, the only book that focuses exclusively on the fascist plot to oust President F.D. Roosevelt is now out of print: The Plot to Seize The White House (New York: Hawthorne Books, 1973) by Julius Archer.  Soon after publishing this, Hawthorne Books went out of business. Second-hand copies are now available for as much as $250.

What's to be learned from all this?  The simple truth that those of us who see a corporatist conspiracy to manipulate and even "steal" our state and national elections, to influence at the highest levels the policies of our government, and to suppress or distort the news that the media reports are not as crazy as our opponents make us out to be.  Because IT HAS ALL HAPPENED BEFORE, and we were JUST DAMN LUCKY THE BASTARDS DIDN'T SUCCEED!

Eternal vigilance, my friends.

So endeth the lesson.

Some other links on the plot, its participants and those who told the tale:

Jules Archer

The putsch that wasn't

The McCormack-Dickstein Committee

The role of Smedley Butler

The American Liberty League

Gerald MacGuire

J. W. Davis

Robert Clark

Grayson Murphy

John Spivak

Corporate Roots of American Fascism

Tags: (all tags) :: Previous Tag Versions

Permalink | 109 comments

  •  Tips are (4.00 / 131)

    always welcome.

    Thanks,

    Steven D

    "I just had the basic view of the American public -- it can't be that bad out there." Marine Travis Williams after 11 members of his squad were killed.

    by Steven D on Sun Feb 27, 2005 at 08:28:42 AM PDT

    •  I wish (none / 0)

      There was a 5 rating. Great diary.

      "If I pay a man enough money to buy my car, he'll buy my car." Henry Ford

      by johnmorris on Sun Feb 27, 2005 at 10:44:16 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  Great Diary...a 4 and Recommended...but, (4.00 / 5)

        I might challenge your last couple paragraphs by asking: who's to say they're not succeeding right now?  PermaWar and the reversal of decades of FDR-initiated improvements in the lives of Americans is happening NOW.

        On another note, I was struck by one part of this story I had not been aware of: Joe McCarthy's dusting off of the Committee used to investigate REAL fascists and a REAL plot to overthrow the US government in order to threaten left-wingers.

        Kind of like Watergate impeachment by the Dems over REAL abuses of power being dusted off by Starr et al. to get Clinton impeached for fallatious reasons, thereby creating an issue that weakened Gore in 2000 (although as we all know, he won).  That was a coup, but just more sophisticated and the result of a better planned and executed strategy.

        PATRIOT I+II, MCA, FISA CAPITULATION, NOW TORTURE. YOUR COUNTRY IS SLOWLY BEING DISMANTLED. WHAT R U GONNA DO ABOUT IT?

        by maxschell on Sun Feb 27, 2005 at 04:00:33 PM PDT

        [ Parent ]

    •  It's funny (none / 0)

      I was just telling some people about Smedley Butler at a party last night and they looked at me like I was from Mars. One friend, as I was leaving, said, "what's the name of that guy again?" I told him I'd send him some stuff. But your presentation isreally well done so I think I'll just send him here.
    •  I'd give you a 5, too ... (none / 0)

      ... this is a fascinating diary with outstanding writing, research and citations (the recovering academic in me really likes to see quality in all three!).

      I certainly do not recall ever learning about this in history class in my day, and my 6th grader surely will never hear of this in public school.

      Thank you - and recommended!

      "It is curious that physical courage should be so common in the world and moral courage so rare" --- Mark Twain

      by murfmom on Sun Feb 27, 2005 at 11:42:28 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

    •  Steven (4.00 / 4)

      I haven't been able to get my hands on a copy of the book yet, but I'm a big Alt-Hist geek so it's only a matter of time.  I've been told by folks on one of the online forums that DC Stephenson as the VP to Lindbergh.  

      We had a big blow up a few years back here in Indiana about having the painting of Gov.Ed Jackson up in the Statehouse gallery featuring all the ex govs.  Eventually they had to take down the painting.  

      Many people have forgotten, but in the 1920's the Klan rose again, and they controlled the state government of many states, well out of the South.  Indiana, Colorado, Oregon all had governments throughouhly infiltrated by the Klan.  In Indiana,  the Klan was particularly taliban-like, and without the being discredited by their leaders rape and murder of Madge Oberholtzer (A movement predicated upon protecting the virtue of white women, suffers whe it's leader rapes and kills one.), it's disturbing to think what might have come to pass.   The Republican party has tried to pretend that past Klan activity was solely something done by Southern Democrats, yet outside the south the Klan was largely Republican.  In Indiana the Klan had signed loyatly oaths from many, many politicians.

      While I was googling around I also came across some stuff about a group called the Black Legion that comitted attacked "Socialists and Communists", and had a political wing, the Wolverine Republican Club:

      The Legion targeted blacks, Jews and Catholics with a message of hate but also considered welfare workers and recipients as well as union organizers of all races, colors and creeds to be an enemy.

      •  Everything old (none / 0)

        is new again, isn't it.  I hope we don't get to the stage where white supremacists or Christian Reconstructionists hold that much power, but the sign are not as favorable as I once thought they were on Election Day eve.

        "I just had the basic view of the American public -- it can't be that bad out there." Marine Travis Williams after 11 members of his squad were killed.

        by Steven D on Sun Feb 27, 2005 at 12:12:45 PM PDT

        [ Parent ]

    •  Great diary (none / 0)

      Amazing this isn't well-known.  I've read a lot about FDR, and never knew this...  Fabulous.
    •  Great Diary (none / 1)

      So glad you wrote it. I'd posted about  the FDR coup on Monday's Cheers and Jeers, with a link to a good summery on it by Lonnie Wolfe, and was feeling like it deserved to have a full diary done, as it is always amazing how few people have heard of it.
      I have never had a chance to read `The Plot to Seize The White House', but would love to if only to see if there is any mention made of what role the Yale `Skull and Bones' society played. If you're so inclined, the connection between the FDR Coup and S&B is worth looking into, (but frustrating as info on both is well suppressed.)

      The opposite of war is not peace, it's creation --Jonathan Larson

      by MaggieEh on Sun Feb 27, 2005 at 04:46:20 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

  •  Whatever Happened To The Movie??? (none / 0)

    A couple of years ago, there was some buzz that Oliver Stone was making a movie about this. Anyone know what's happened?
  •  very interesting (4.00 / 2)

    Looks like the same old names of the rich and powerful pulling the same old tricks for decades. In one sense, this is encouraging, because it shows that they were unable to prevail in the past, which means that we can hope to thwart their schemes again in the present.
  •  note Brwon Bros Harriman (4.00 / 18)

    and that will give you a clear indication of the bipartisan nature of this problem

    Averill Harriman is going to become a key Democratic player  -- remember that he represented the US in the USSR, he b ecamse Governor of NY, and his widow Pamela (who had previously been married to Randolph Churchill, Winston's son) ran a salon in Georgetown to anoint upcoming leaders  -- both Clinton and Gore could qualify as her proteges, and Clinton named her as Ambassador to France

    Also remember that the man who ran Brown Bros Harriman at a later point was Prescott Bush, later himself a Senator from CT.  We already know that their economic interests kept them active in Germany even after it was supposed to  be illegal.

    But they were not alone.  After all, Henry Ford, who ran editorial after editorial of anti-Semitic crap on the font-page of the Dearborn Independent (and later republished this junk as The International JES"  THE World's Foremost Problem, a book from which Hitler borrowed generously for Mein Kampf)  was a co-founder (along with Lindbergh) of the Liberty League, which opposed Lend-Lease to Britain, and he also was a principal funder of the anti-semitic Catholic Priest Charles Coughlin.

    The Nazis could not have run their bureaucracies, including the deat camps, as efficiently as they did without the use of tabulating equipment generously sold them by Thomas Watson senior, head of what became IBM.

    Most Americans do not learn about the plot against Roosevelt when they study US History in high school.  It seems to me that should be a mandatory item about which people should learn.  My students learn all of this, very little of which is in their textbook.

    do we still have a Republic and a Constitution if our elected officials will not stand up for them on our behalf?

    by teacherken on Sun Feb 27, 2005 at 08:52:50 AM PDT

    •  Well you're a good teacher Ken (4.00 / 2)

      First I heard of this was a few days ago when I came across it surfing for something else.

      And yes, the extent to which both parties are implicated (or factions of the Democratic party, since obviously the New Dealers weren't involved in the plot) makes this very frightening.

      What concerned me when I worked for Election Protection in Cleveland on Election Day was all the reports we got about problems created by Democratic officials at the polling places.  I expected problems with Republican officials, but Democrats?  Makes you wonder.

      "I just had the basic view of the American public -- it can't be that bad out there." Marine Travis Williams after 11 members of his squad were killed.

      by Steven D on Sun Feb 27, 2005 at 09:05:24 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  HUH ? (none / 0)

        What reports re: Dems ?  I hadn't heard about that. Please, sir, I want some more !

        Let's get some Democracy for America

        by murphy on Sun Feb 27, 2005 at 09:08:25 AM PDT

        [ Parent ]

        •  I was manning phones (4.00 / 2)

          at one of the Cleveland EP offices regarding complaints from our volunteers.  One involved attempts by a Democratic election official to have us thrown off the premises even though we were non-partisan group.

          Others involved Dem officials who were challenging voters, or requiring photo id of only minority voters (which was not required except in certain highly circumscribed instances).  And of course the complete and utter failure of the Cleveland Board of Elections to get enough machines to the many precincts even though we had reports that they had machines on hand but weren't distributing them.

          "I just had the basic view of the American public -- it can't be that bad out there." Marine Travis Williams after 11 members of his squad were killed.

          by Steven D on Sun Feb 27, 2005 at 09:41:01 AM PDT

          [ Parent ]

          •  Umm...this might sound weird... (none / 1)

            but do folks here think the same people were behind the assassinations of MLK and JFK...possibly RFK?

            MLK was fine when he was talking about desegregation, but then he really shocked folks by talking about the Vietnam war and the Poor People's Campaign. There's been a huge, gaping hole in the American media to cover King v. Jowers, the civil trial that found there was a conspiracy to assassinate MLK that involved local, state and federal government agencies.

            Just wonderin'...

            "The revolution's just an ethical haircut away..." Billy Bragg

            by grannyhelen on Sun Feb 27, 2005 at 10:58:44 AM PDT

            [ Parent ]

            •  deeper link (none / 1)

              To get straight to the trial transcripts, click here.

              "The revolution's just an ethical haircut away..." Billy Bragg

              by grannyhelen on Sun Feb 27, 2005 at 11:00:08 AM PDT

              [ Parent ]

            •  There's a long answer to that question... (none / 0)

              ...and it's in the book The Assassinations (www.theassassinations.com).

              Funny - I was just posting about Smedley Butler a week ago myself - check out http://realhistoryarchives.blogspot.com.

              Granny - I'd say easily we could say it was the same forces. In some cases, there's certainly a familiar set of names. But the exact same people - no - too far apart in age. But the reasons are the same - keeping the people down while bolstering the elite. That's much too simplistic, but I pointed you to a 600+ page answer...! ;-)

              Real History Lisa http://realhistoryarchives.blogspot.com

              by Lisa in Los Angeles on Sun Feb 27, 2005 at 09:10:56 PM PDT

              [ Parent ]

              •  the truth is never quick n easy, no? (none / 0)

                the King v Jowers trial transcripts are somewhere over 1,000 pages, so I'm used to sorting thru reams of info :-)

                thanks for the link!

                "The revolution's just an ethical haircut away..." Billy Bragg

                by grannyhelen on Mon Feb 28, 2005 at 07:13:50 AM PDT

                [ Parent ]

      •  I read recently that McCarthyism was initiated by (none / 0)

        Democrats. I was a little shocked by this.

        I read about Smedley Butler about a year ago, and poked around a little bit. Quite an omission of history, I would say.

        It is good that these issues are being talked about on this 'Democrat Blog'. I think it really lays the groundwork for an anti-corporatist initiative, which, as I have said before, is imperative if the Dems are ever going to be a powerful political force.

        Sharing and Caring are for Commies! They should be illegal. Drop by and support the Human Agenda

        by k9disc on Sun Feb 27, 2005 at 07:38:23 PM PDT

        [ Parent ]

    •  In An Interview on NPR (none / 0)

      I heard a Ford family historian say: the only picture of an American that Hitler had in his office(s) was that of Henry Ford.  

      "War is the greatest of all crimes; and yet there is no aggressor who does not color his crime with the pretext of justice." Voltaire

      by lostian1 on Sun Feb 27, 2005 at 05:30:36 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

    •  Skull & Bones (none / 1)

      Averill Harriman joined Yale's secret society Skull & Bones in 1913. His brother Edward Roland Noel Harriman was choosen in 1917, in the same year Prescott Bush (GWB's grandfather) becomes a member.
      Whatever function it may serve (or not) in the present day, the members of this society in the early part of the 20th century wielded enormous hidden power. Put this together with the fact that the Yale branch is belived to be decended from a university society in Germany (early 18oo's), and the FDR coup gets murkier still.

      The opposite of war is not peace, it's creation --Jonathan Larson

      by MaggieEh on Sun Feb 27, 2005 at 07:18:44 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

  •  Thank you for this (4.00 / 14)

    The story of this plot isn't widely known, and it's rarely discussed.  Ardent readers of the late Steve Kangas' Liberalism Resurgent work will have come across it, of course (which you linked to).

    The rich and powerful have always had an incentive to use that power rather than work through the Democratic system.  Not the least of their goals has been to hold on to that power.  

    Democratic government serves as a counterbalance to the unequal distribution of power the marketplace produces.  Unfortunately, we're now living in a time in which the power of the marketplace has assumed an inordinate amount of sway.  Worse, parts of government have been hijacked and put in the service of reinforcing the power of the marketplace.

    •  in five simple sentences... (none / 0)

      you wriite the best summary of the reactionary Bush presidency.

      here's a FOUR!

      "With Liberty and Justice for All" Economic -7.88 / Social -6.46

      by ohshenandoah on Sun Feb 27, 2005 at 12:15:44 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

    •  Right-wing and Left-wing economic fallacy. (none / 1)

      Democratic government serves as a counterbalance to the unequal distribution of power the marketplace produces. Unfortunately, we're now living in a time in which the power of the marketplace has assumed an inordinate amount of sway.

      It is much more than the power of the "marketplace." But it is an artifact of the simplifications required to do economic theory.

      Economic transactions always occur within a framework of politics. That is why the discipline was called Political Economics in the 19th Century. But the elements of that discipline that could be simplified enough to apply mathematics were stripped out and took over the name Economics. The elemnts that set up the conditions for the economic transactions (called politics) cannot be simplified, so they are ignored.

      The point is, the market is made up of both politics and economics. If you only look at the economics, then a lot of people get screwed. The problem isn't the marketplace. It is ignoring the political aspects of the marketplace.

      As an example, the mathematical discipline of Economics provides no guide for the distribution of the profits of a company between capital and labor. So if Capital has all the political power, they take the profits. But if labor builds countervailing political power then they can obtain a share of those profits they created.

      Of course, if labor misuses the political power of working as a group, they can also take the profit out of the business. But that will destroy the business.

      The solution of capital is to exclude labor from any power. But in Europe, the solution is to have government step in (the issue is power, of course) and set up fair and equal power distributions. That is why labor is placed on the Board of Directors in Germany.

      Haven't heard that in American education, have you? That's because capital and management controls the education system.

      By the way, it is the DNC who "gets" this, not the extremist liberals.

      Those of you who object ot NAFTA - what happens if NAFTA is repealed? The businesses contionue to move overseas. They simply don't have any rules at all when they do it.

      The problem with NAFTA is inadequate provision for displaced labor (attempted, but poorly) and no provisions for Environmental considerations. Those are problems that require a better NAFTA, not eliminating it.

      Democrats stand for Liberty, Security, Support of Families and Opportunity Whiskey Tango Foxtrot - over

      by Rick B on Sun Feb 27, 2005 at 09:34:21 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  Hmmm (none / 0)

        Economic transactions always occur within a framework of politics. That is why the discipline was called Political Economics in the 19th Century. But the elements of that discipline that could be simplified enough to apply mathematics were stripped out and took over the name Economics. The elemnts that set up the conditions for the economic transactions (called politics) cannot be simplified, so they are ignored.

        I agree with this, and in fact think that we're pretty much saying the same thing.  As I read it, you're simply describing one of the prime methods by which democratic government balances the unequal judgements of the marketplace.

        As George Will(!) has famously said, "capitalism is a government program".  Modern capitalism (the "marketplace") functions because govenrment sets up rules for its functioning.  Those rules, which are obviously motivated by political considerations, help to control market outcomes and mitigate the extremes to which capitalism might otherwise tend (and yes, I do think it's possible to have a "marketplace" largely free of politics -- but nothing near what we enjoy in modern capitalism).

        In addition to this, however, I think the basic model of democratic government -- a system in which representatives compete for constituents among the (almost) entire adult population -- stands in contrast to the model of modern capitalism -- a system in which businesses compete for clients among a much more limited population.  I'm not arguing against capitalism by any means: it's the best human system I know of to efficiently allocate resources.  But without democratic government moderating, rather than reinforcing, market judgements, modern capitalism will tend to result in ever-increasing inequality in both economic and political power, as well as shares of resources and benefits.

  •  I always enjoy when history becomes news! (none / 0)

    Thanks so much for this. I vaguely remembered reference to this , and it's good to have it brought to the forefront. Hearty recommend...

    Dudehisattva...

    "Generosity, Ethics, Patience, Effort, Concentration, and Wisdom"

    by Dood Abides on Sun Feb 27, 2005 at 09:26:06 AM PDT

  •  The person who brought this to my attention (4.00 / 3)

    twenty-five years ago was a U.S. Marine officer (he looked like a recruiting poster and was no fool). Smedley Butler remians a hero in the Corps. They know, they've been around the world.
    •  yep we were taught about him in bootcamp (none / 1)

      at Parrfis Island in 1965, although the drill instructor only mentioned in passign the bit about the plot.

      Now, here's the question.  Butler is one of two Marines to win TWO medals of honor.  Any real Marine can name the others?  Any takers?

      do we still have a Republic and a Constitution if our elected officials will not stand up for them on our behalf?

      by teacherken on Sun Feb 27, 2005 at 12:43:11 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

  •  Even More Interesting... (none / 0)

    ...Is that the Bush family may have, at the time, had close ties with these people.

    Do some research sometime. You'd be amazed at how much of our modern world ex-Nazis and Nazi collaborators control.

  •  As I've said before, (none / 1)

    and will say again, Al From is a repub plant.

    Bush's presidency is now inextricably yoked to the policies of aggression and subjugation. Mike Whitney

    by dfarrah on Sun Feb 27, 2005 at 09:56:00 AM PDT

  •  If they are going to overthrow FDR's America (none / 1)

    They better add Marijuana Prohibition to the list.

    Victim of the *other* war America is waging.

    by nephalim on Sun Feb 27, 2005 at 09:59:11 AM PDT

  •  Outstanding! (4.00 / 4)

    here I've been thinking all along that the young whippersnappers at this blog are at a disadvantage because they have to learn many things that I experienced in real time and thus are immune in my mind to revisionism, e.g., the sanctification of Ronald Reagan, whose presidency I vividly remember as a disaster.

    And then I read this amazing story, of which I was completely ignorant. Thank you so much for finding and posting this. It's good to learn, every day if possible.

    I read "The Plot Against America" - highly recommended, as is this diary.

    I wonder if my history-loving husband, raised in a "pinko" family, knows this story?

    The only thing we have to fear is fear itself.

    by sidnora on Sun Feb 27, 2005 at 10:04:54 AM PDT

    •  Ironic, isn't it (4.00 / 3)

      that the big conservative compalint about how history is taught in the schools is how it is tto leftist oriented.

      For example, "A Politically Incorrect Guide to American History," by Thomas E. Woods, Jr. published by Regnery, has gooten all sorts of attention and plaudits from the right wing even though it's a blatant distortion of our history.  Yet, the truth is that much of history has been censored to protect the powerful.

      "I just had the basic view of the American public -- it can't be that bad out there." Marine Travis Williams after 11 members of his squad were killed.

      by Steven D on Sun Feb 27, 2005 at 10:12:48 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  Absolutely agree (none / 0)

        how many (not referring to Kossacks, but the general public) know about the Bush family ties to Nazi Germany?

        The only thing we have to fear is fear itself.

        by sidnora on Sun Feb 27, 2005 at 10:32:17 AM PDT

        [ Parent ]

      •  "A Politically Incorrect Guide..." (none / 0)

        funny, I was just looking at the amazon.com listing for The Plot to Seize The White House (dag, you were right - cheapest used copy was $199!), and clicked on the link for Woods's book. Oddly enough, I gathered from some of the customer reviews that someone in The Weekly Standard really slammed it. But then, we all know what a leftist rag the Standard is. ;-)

        thanks for this diary. I had heard about this plot once before, in The 60 Greatest Conspiracies of All Time (man, they're up to 80 now). I'm stunned that there has only been one book written about this, and that it's out of print.

        -8.25, -6.26 "I'm not superstitious. But, I AM a little stitious." - Michael Scott

        by snookybeh on Sun Feb 27, 2005 at 11:58:47 AM PDT

        [ Parent ]

      •  You should check out (none / 0)

        Lies My Teacher Told Me by James Loewen.  A really interesting history that focuses on areas where American history textbooks normally go astray.  There's a particular emphasis on our national discomfort when it comes to talking out our problems with racism.

        There have been a couple other "liberal histories", most famously Howard Zinn's A People's History of the United States.  I honestly wasn't as big a fan of this one, although it's interesting.

        Read James Loewen's "Sundown Towns"!

        by ChicagoDem on Sun Feb 27, 2005 at 01:09:14 PM PDT

        [ Parent ]

  •  Kinda makes a little conspiracy (4.00 / 2)

    to supress voting in democratic precincts seem almost quaint, doesn't it?

    Come see TV from the reality-based community at RealityBasedTV.com

    by MarkInSanFran on Sun Feb 27, 2005 at 10:52:29 AM PDT

  •  For you historian types (none / 0)

    The Committee's authority to subpoena witnesses expired at the end of 1934, and the Justice Department started no criminal investigation.

    I wonder if any correspondence about this decision is buried among the trivia of Department of Justice Papers at the National Archives.

    •  Don't know (none / 0)

      I do hope to find a copy of Archer's book in our library system and see what additional sources are there.

      "I just had the basic view of the American public -- it can't be that bad out there." Marine Travis Williams after 11 members of his squad were killed.

      by Steven D on Sun Feb 27, 2005 at 11:48:21 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

    •  It's a mistake to assume (4.00 / 5)

      It really is a mistake to assume that this story is unknown among those who have any interest in the history of the 1930's.  It's been written about in many venues -- it just isn't in the popular text books.  

      And the story is more complicated.  

      Butler reported MacGuire's propositions to J. Edgar Hoover -- but Hoover didn't want to investigate because of WHO the targets would be, so that is why it was handed off to Samuel Dickstein's Committee.  Apparently Hoover assumed that a little sunlight would stop the conspiracy, and in a sense he was correct.  However the record shows that everything Hoover knew did go to FDR -- and one has to assume FDR was pretty much calling the shots in 34-35.  

      But there was a second part of the coup -- some of the people around MacGuire introduced Butler to Father Coughlin, and Coughlin tried to get Butler to lead an armed expedition into Mexico for the purpose of ousting the Cardenas regime (which had promoted anticlericalism in Mexico), and Butler also reported this to Hoover, who in turn passed the information to FDR.  Because this was summer before the 1936 election, FDR did not make it public (he needed Catholic votes and many of them were in love with Charles Coughlin), but he also didn't let go of it -- Hoover stayed on the case for several years -- and used it as an important "case" for increasing the power and funding for the FBI.  Eventually he did bring a case against associates of Coughlin, though it pretty much fell apart at trial.  

      By 1936 Coughlin was receiving NAZI funding -- which he continued to receive into 1942 when in time of War FDR was finally able to convince Spellman to silence Coughlin.  But FDR and Hoover knew about the Nazi funds from 36 on -- and kept watch on it.  

      To make the story even more messy, when Historians got into the CPUSA (Communist Party of the USA) files in Moscow after the demise of the Soviet Union -- the files were sent from NYC to Moscow in the immediate post war period for "safe keeping" -- lo and behold, guess who the CPUSA had on retainer in this time period?  Samuel Dickstein.  It was small potatoes, a few thousand at a time, but this HERO of anti-fascism who represented New York's Lower East Side was selling congressional information and influence to the CPUSA.  From all anyone can tell -- neither Hoover nor FDR knew this.  

      For lots of information about Hoover's treatment of the Coup's revealed by Butler my immediate source is Curt Gentry's "J. Edgar Hoover: The Man and the Secrets" Norton, 1991.  It was a NYTimes list best seller for months -- and much of the Butler material is there.  There are a few good biographies of Coughlin that tell the "Mexican Invasion" story -- but the real meat of how FDR thought about stuff like this is in a number of sources that deal with FDR's relationship with the Vatican in the late 30's and onward.  The FDR Library declassified much material a few years ago as part of a conference, and posted it on the net -- but I really recommend "Roosevelt and Romanism: Catholics and American Diplomacy, 1937-1945", by George Q Flynn. Greenwood, 1976.

      The Butler story is important -- but it needs to be put in context.  The 1930's are filled with coup plans and all sorts of plotting, and at least in reference to the US, you have to appreciate FDR as a past master of political intrigue which he used to his own ends.  In the case of the Industrialists behind the effort to get Butler to lead a coup (it should be mentioned that it was assumed he could get the American Legion to follow him), FDR saw to it that they were identified -- and placed as part of the Liberty Lobby, and by the summer of 1936 he had the Republicans begging the Liberty Lobby not to endorse Alf Landon.  What started as a Coup against FDR became a kind of smear against Republicans in the hands of a totally master pol like FDR.  

      But yea -- History is fun.  

      •  Liberty Lobby job interview 1970 (none / 1)

        I was job hunting after moving to DC and naive.  One interview was with the Liberty Lobby, of which I knew nothing but they had offices at the foot of Capitol Hill, seemed genuine and I was getting pretty desperate.  At the close of a friendly meeting, I was informed that I would have to take a lie detector test before I would be hired.  Shock!  Chagrin.  I said "no thank you" and walked out.  I'm eternally grateful they were so paranoid and showed their colors.
      •  Yes with history (none / 0)

        I'm always just scratching the surface.

        Thanks for the additional info.  That sounds like Hoover's mo.  PR hound who didn't like to do any digging into right wing extremists unless he was forced to.

        "I just had the basic view of the American public -- it can't be that bad out there." Marine Travis Williams after 11 members of his squad were killed.

        by Steven D on Mon Feb 28, 2005 at 04:13:48 AM PDT

        [ Parent ]

  •  Great work (4.00 / 2)

    Like many others, I had no idea of this plot.  

    The question for today, is whether the plot has already succeeded.  Certainly the NeoCon Times is playing the same role today as it played then.

    A vote for Bush is a vote for Osama.

    by Alan S on Sun Feb 27, 2005 at 12:39:27 PM PDT

  •  FDR - a TRUE Democrat (4.00 / 2)

    This is a great download. It's the speech given by Franklin Delano Roosevelt as he accepted the Democratic Nomination for President on June 27, 1936. The man was a TRUE Democrat. One listen and you'll immediately realize how far to the right our party has traveled -- and where its' true roots lie. It's inspiring to say the least:

    http://www.whitehousetapes.org/archive/RG01_wh_recordings/S01_fdr/speeches/fdr_1936_0627.mp3

  •  It's almost always (4.00 / 3)

    "them" who did it whenever a new barbaric murder occurs, political assassinations and other bizarre sudden random outbursts like anthrax attacks and whatnot, and everybody at heart really knows it was "them" who did it and furthermore we all know that coverups and arm-twisting and bribery and blackmail and behind-the-scene deals is the normal order of battle with that crowd. We're not new to the notion that even at the best of times what is reported is not everything that is actually happening.

    But what is going on now is just far beyond the pale. The entire world is agape at the spectacle of this gang of greaseball gangsters that have hijacked the Republican Party with their mob of bloodthirsty fundies and are wrecking the national economy solely to increase the wealth and power of "their world." Though "nobody will admit it," everyone knows every piece of shit thrown in America's face is nearly always engineered by this crowd.

    What is it, over $460 billion this year? Over $500 billion next year when you include all the new "law and order" you're getting at home now too?

    Dollar about to tank? People lose their investments? Surprise! Guess who owns all the businesses that will RAKE IN?

    What the fuck is going on there? I mean, we got guys in the WH taking all 8" whilst fondling the latest Bunkerbuster report or what? Cute little missile shields? Maybe they got that idea on irc chat with buttMIRV. Thing we do know: who owns all those fucking companies.

    Rumours are all over the place. Try reading some world papers for a change, buddy. They aren't going away just because "the media" isn't reporting it. This also is a well-known fact: "they" own the media. I don't give a shit that you don't wanna remember that.

    Those fuckers are the worst disaster to hit the US since the Civil War. You might not even have 4 months, never mind 4 years.

    Conservatives should never be allowed to gain power more than 25% of the time, and this shows why.

    •  By the way (none / 0)

      those s.o.b.'s piss me off so much my rant started drifting off course a bit, upon review. I was subconsciously starting to include responses to the blog I read just before this one, one of the "I am Joe Shit4Branes" ones. Whenever anyone says "I was deceived by the fancy rhetoric!" I just don't believe that excuse. They were "deceived" by their assessments of the "benefits" they would accrue by going along with the song and dance is the only thing they were "deceived" by.

      And then there are the truly stupid, which our pals bu$hco have thrown into the mix and they can't be discounted like they normally deserve because who knows what the F. they will do next.

      But the ones who voted for them but should've known better? They know all their excuses are b.s., which is why many of them will never turn. They just voted for an effort to get some larceny and bigotry against their neighbours voted in legal, and they know it.

  •  great diary (4.00 / 4)

    Certainly lends credence to the theory that the current bunch of shysters are an inevitibility rather than an aberration.

    The really depressing thing? - Even if they are toppled another regime will spring up to take its place. And that regime will be supported by exactly the same financial interests.

    Time for this country to do some very serious soul searching, once may be an aberration - more than once is structural.

  •  Wow... (none / 0)

    That was frightening reading!  Thanks for posting it.

    "Accepting the inevitable"

    by waztec on Sun Feb 27, 2005 at 02:10:12 PM PDT

  •  Remember _Portraits In Courage_? (none / 0)

    Smedley's story should be written up like a chapter, and published.  This diary could serve almost as an outline.
  •  Thank you for writing this diary! (4.00 / 4)

    I've known about the plot for some years now and have been pointing out to friends and family that what is happening now has happened before. Although, I never looked for alot of great references on it, which you have, fortunately for me, provided.

    I actually came across this plot by accident. I enjoy reading "possible" conspiracy stories and I also enjoy World War Two history. Unfortunately, TeacherKen was never my teacher. In just about every school I have ever attended or show I have seen, America didn't enter the war (WW2) until after Pearl Harbor because we were "Isolationists." Isolationists? Well, why? Nevermind. We just were. Isolationism is always used to cover up why we really didn't get involved earlier, IMHO, and it is because so many in this country wanted Fascism to succeed.

    Coupled with this, I think once FDR knew about the plot to overthrow him, I think he used it for it political black mail of sorts. I think he used it to bargain with them and tell them what they were going to do and, as a result, he wouldn't prosecute them. Of course, they still had alot of control of the media so he, FDR, couldn't just convince the people to go help what would become, "The Allies." I do think FDR figured out Pearl Harbor was going to happen and was able to use it to finally overcome the "isolationism" pedaled by those who supported Fascism in this country.

    Tied in with this, I think the right wingers (Neo-Cons) "in the know" haven't forgotten this lesson, which is why they stated in 1998 they needed a new Pearl Harbor to push the country to the right. As a result, I don't think they were in league with Bin Laden, but I think they saw 9/11 coming and willfully chose to let our defenses down in order to justify their plans. There is plenty of evidence in the 9/11 committee reports to support this theory and probably even more held in National Security Archives, such as why Air Defense Forces were ordered to stand down on the morning of 9/11/2001 for supposed "wargames."

    Oh, what a tangled web we weave...

    The sleep of reason produces monsters.

    by Alumbrados on Sun Feb 27, 2005 at 02:53:07 PM PDT

  •  Meet the Enemy... (4.00 / 7)

    Nor, finally, is it in any way a "theory" that the one, single name that can be directly linked to the Third Reich, the US military industrial complex, Skull and Bones, Eastern Establishment good ol' boys, the Illuminati, Big Texas Oil, the Bay of Pigs, the Miami Cubans, the Mafia, the FBI, the JFK assassination, the New World Order, Watergate, the Republican National Committee, Eastern European fascists, the Council on Foreign Relations, the Trilateral Commission, the United Nations, CIA headquarters, the October Surprise, the Iran/Contra scandal, Inslaw, the Christic Institute, Manuel Noriega, drug-running "freedom fighters" and death squads, Iraqgate, Saddam Hussein, weapons of mass destruction, the blood of innocents, the savings and loan crash, the Bank of Credit and Commerce International, the "Octopus," the "Enterprise," the Afghan mujaheddin, the War on Drugs, Mena (Arkansas), Whitewater, Sun Myung Moon, the Carlyle Group, Osama bin Laden and the Saudi royal family, David Rockefeller, Henry Kissinger, and the presidency and vice-presidency of the United States, is: George Herbert Walker Bush.
    •  Would make a great diary if you could (none / 1)

      put it together with some commentary and some links.
    •  Read the Unauthorized Biography (none / 1)

      There's also a good theory about the Reagan hit regarding GWHB in that book, which is online at http://tarpley.net.  There's also an interesting history of corporate naziism here:

      http://www.spiritone.com/~gdy52150/noon.html

      Then there's always this picture which gives me a headache:

      •  Wow. (4.00 / 2)

        From your link above:

        this executive order was signed 7 days before Reagan was shot:

        "Partly in an effort to bring harmony to the Reagan high command, it has been decided that Vice President George Bush will be placed in charge of a new structure for national security crisis management, according to senior presidential assistants. This assignment will amount to an unprecedented role for a vice president in modern times. In the Carter administration, the crisis management structure was chaired by Zbigniew Brzezinski, the national security adviser. [...]

        On a broader, policy-making level, senior White House officials were unhappy with what they felt to be ill-timed and ill-considered actions by Secretary of State Alexander M. Haig Jr. that placed the brightest spotlight on El Salvador at a time when the administration was trying to focus maximum attention on Reagan's economic proposals. [...]

        Bush's stature, by virtue of job title and experience, was cited as the reason that he was chosen to chair meetings in the Situation Room in time of crisis. Principal officials involved in crisis management will be the secretaries of state and defense, the Central Intelligence Agency director, the national security adviser, Meese, and Baker, officials said, adding that the structure has not been fully devised nor the presidential directive written.

        Reagan officials emphasized that Bush, a former director of the CIA and former United Nations Ambassador, would be able to preserve White House control over crisis management without irritating Haig, who they stressed was probably the most experienced and able of all other officials who could serve in that function.

        "The reason for this [choice of Bush] is that the secretary of state might wish he were chairing the crisis management structure," said one Reagan official, "but it is pretty hard to argue with the vice president being in charge." [fn 7]

        PATRIOT I+II, MCA, FISA CAPITULATION, NOW TORTURE. YOUR COUNTRY IS SLOWLY BEING DISMANTLED. WHAT R U GONNA DO ABOUT IT?

        by maxschell on Mon Feb 28, 2005 at 04:06:56 AM PDT

        [ Parent ]

        •  Maybe this was why Haig (none / 1)

          was running around saying he was in charge?

          "I just had the basic view of the American public -- it can't be that bad out there." Marine Travis Williams after 11 members of his squad were killed.

          by Steven D on Mon Feb 28, 2005 at 04:16:18 AM PDT

          [ Parent ]

          •  Perhaps...but, (none / 1)

            I think the larger point is that Bush the elder was put in charge in the event of a "national security crisis."  While I'm not aware of the full body of evidence on this point, it seems Bush/Rumsfeld/Cheney team have made a habit of preparing for, and profiting from, NSC's over the past 40+ years.  Maybe Bush got the VP nod b/c he/Baker was the one that pulled off the October surprise.

            Certainly, his son is the person who profited (in terms of power) the most from the NSC created by 9/11.

            PATRIOT I+II, MCA, FISA CAPITULATION, NOW TORTURE. YOUR COUNTRY IS SLOWLY BEING DISMANTLED. WHAT R U GONNA DO ABOUT IT?

            by maxschell on Mon Feb 28, 2005 at 12:28:13 PM PDT

            [ Parent ]

  •  Addendum... (none / 1)

    "Facism will come to America
    in the guise of national security"
    - Jim Garrison in 1967, the only man to bring
    a suspect to court for the Kennedy assassination...
    •  Whoa... (none / 0)

      did not know he said this...was this in JFK?  Do you have a cite/authority for this?

      PATRIOT I+II, MCA, FISA CAPITULATION, NOW TORTURE. YOUR COUNTRY IS SLOWLY BEING DISMANTLED. WHAT R U GONNA DO ABOUT IT?

      by maxschell on Sun Feb 27, 2005 at 04:01:40 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  He did say this (none / 0)

        In an Interview with Playboy magazine October 1967.

        Careful about citing Garrison though. He wasn't really playing with a full deck. I know a lot of people think of him as the character Kevin Costner played in JFK. But a little research shows that Garrison had his own problems. He originally alleged that the plot to kill Kennedy was a "homosexual thrill killing" according to this article from the New York Times Magazine August 6th 1995.

        It is widely believed now that Garrison was more likely the conspirator in the prosecution of an innocent man, New Orleans businessman Clay shaw (by the way, the jury took less than 45 minutes to return a not-guilty verdict in this case).

        The Times article cited above shows several other reasons to believe that this prosecution was a "travesty of justice", including the fact that Garrison destroyed 4 file cabinets full of documents related to the case before leaving office in 1974.  According to the article's author, Gerald Posner, "Louis Iron, Garrison's chief investigator, confirmed to me that the staff pruned the investigatory files before Connick took charge; they feared an abuse of process suit by Shaw, and possible Federal prosecution against Garrison."

        Here are a couple of other quotes from Wikipedia regarding Jim Garrison;

        "This is not the first time I've charged a person before I've made the case."
        -- Jim Garrison [James Phelan, Scandals, Scamps, and Scoundrels (New York: Random House, 1982), p. 155.]

        "Most of the time you marshal your facts, then deduce your theories. But Garrison deduced a theory, then he marshaled the facts. And if the facts didn't fit he'd say they had been altered by the CIA."
        -- Charles Ward, former assistant to Garrison [Patricia Lambert, False Witness (New York: M. Evans and Co., 1998), p. 228.]

  •  Fantastic Diary (4.00 / 3)

    I didn't know anything about this.

    I'm reading a book called "My twenty-five years in China" by John Powell, published in 1945, and it has this to say about General Smedley Butler:

    "The American forces were commanded [mid-1920's]by General Smedley Butler, a veteran of the Boxer campaign in 1900. Butler, a Quaker, constantly exasperated the other commanders by issuing pacifist declarations to the press."

    ...

    "Later, after General Butler had returned to the United States, he declared that his forces had not fired a single hostile shot while they were stationed in China.  Following his retirement he delivered speeches advocating the withdrawal of all American and other foreign forces from China."

    Now that's my kind of General.  No wonder the military doesn't mind Quakers being conscientious objectors today--they likely had their fill of one in the form of Smedley Butler eighty years ago.

    •  Some Quakers still serve (none / 0)

      Smedley's legacy may indeed include a large number of concientious objectors, but he did serve and others continue to.  

      I've been reading comments by this fellow on another board for years.  He's a gem:

      http://www.aetheling.com/essays/pacifism.htm

      Wherever you find a pacifist in uniform, there's an incredible story.

      McCain housing policy shaped by lobbyist

      by guy smiley on Sun Feb 27, 2005 at 11:07:44 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  not all of us Quakers are absolute pacifists (none / 0)

        Go back to the American revolution  -- one of the most gifted of Washington's generals was Nathaniel Greene, who was 'read out" of Meeting because he took up arms.

        I considered my orientation to be Quaker when I enlisted in the Marines in 1965 [I didn't official join until 2003], but my recruiting sergeant convinced me that I would not want to have Society of Friends on my dog tags and personnel records  B TW, I was opposed to the conflict in Vietnam, but at that time believed i ahd an obligation to serve, and my service was in data processing and in the post band at Quantico.  For what it is worth, my Monthly Meeting has 2 others who served in the Marines, both actually in the mian Marine Band, with one replacing the other.  One of these just did a tour in Baghdad as a member of a Christian Peacemakers team.

        The use of force is always a last resort.  One remembers that when William Penn was being drawn to the Quakers, he asked Geroge Fox how long he should continue to wear his sword (as a gentleman), and Fox replied "as long as thee can."  Fox himself was asked both by Cromwell and by men with whom he was imprisoned to take a commission as an officer, but declined.

        For myself, I accept that the military is a necessary force.  But I trust the view of military men who say that if they have to go to war in some sense they have already failed in their mission.

        There are circumstances in which I will, reluctantly, use violence, even to the point of deadly force.  It will never be to protect myself, even at the cost of my own life.  I admire those whose pacifiscm is deeper than my own, but I -- loike othes with whom I attend Meeting for worship -- have to make my ownd ecisions, based on my own moral conscience.  BTW  -- that is far harder to do than to have a fixed position of no violence or that the decision to use violence can be made for one by others.

        Butler is a true American hero.  Too bad learning about him is not required for all Americans  --  but if you go through m y classroom, you will learn about him.

        do we still have a Republic and a Constitution if our elected officials will not stand up for them on our behalf?

        by teacherken on Mon Feb 28, 2005 at 07:12:38 AM PDT

        [ Parent ]

        •  Would make a good title for a sports team (none / 0)

          The Fighting Quakers!

          ;0)

          "I just had the basic view of the American public -- it can't be that bad out there." Marine Travis Williams after 11 members of his squad were killed.

          by Steven D on Mon Feb 28, 2005 at 07:23:28 AM PDT

          [ Parent ]

          •  umm I think it has already been used (none / 0)

            since a number of Quaker Colleges and schools simply call their sports teams "Quakers."

            Let me give you an old (crica 1960's) cheer from Haverford College:


            Eviscertae, Eviscerate,
            Gouge out their eyes!
            Come on, Quakers,
            Kill thos guys!
            Blood, Blood, Blood!

            The short form of this wa simply

            KILL QUAKERS KILL

            do we still have a Republic and a Constitution if our elected officials will not stand up for them on our behalf?

            by teacherken on Mon Feb 28, 2005 at 09:04:10 AM PDT

            [ Parent ]

  •  Great diary. Recommend! (none / 0)

    I read about Gen. Butler years ago and have linked to a lot of the same sources in my 'blog often. It is one fabulous antidote for the "it can't happen here" virus that seems to infect too many Americans. There is seldom a true left or right in the halls of power, only greed and the choice between the faces of fascist leanings. That is because the power rests in the money-men who will do virtually anything to prevent real populism from taking root. Better to scare our booties off and emplant the fear of socialism or communism as the most feared enemies. The other transient enemies exist merely as excuses for "security" and other means of control. If you want to find the real enemies of the people, you need to look to the "royalty" of America, the top 1% of the food chain and the talking heads they finance.

    Smedley Butler knew what he was talking about! "War is a Racket" should be required reading in every school that allows military vultures to roam their halls. Hell, it should be required reading anyway along with every document regarding Paperclip, Nazi companies' damage payments, the annex of Hawaii, Occupation of the Philippines, contracts with native Americans and a host of other material that reveals who really holds the reigns and how/why policy is written and executed. It's about time more blindered flag-wavers knew what America's policies were really about.

  •  Small Quibble about DuPont (none / 0)

    The DuPont Company was a major subcontractor on the A-bomb -- the original purpose was to use it on Germany. DuPont engineers worked on the Hanford plutonium enrichment facilities. The firm was intimately involved in the Manhattan Project. Crawford Greenewalt, the first non-DuPont to head the  firm, worked with men such as Groves and Compton, and Manhattan Project leaders.He was at the University of Chicago when the atom was first "smashed." I doubt if he was there in behalf of the Nazis.
    •  Money (none / 0)

      If DuPont was most interested in profit and power, taking out FDR was a sensible investment in the early 30's. In the early 40's the profit and power was in the war effort, and no place more so than in the Manhattan Project.

      Crawford Greenwalt was a great scientist, but when he watched dawn of the nuclear age, he was there on behalf of the shareholders.  

      The opposite of war is not peace, it's creation --Jonathan Larson

      by MaggieEh on Sun Feb 27, 2005 at 05:20:58 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

    •  Married to Irenee Du Pont (none / 0)

      Crawford H. Greenewalt graduated from MIT with a degree in chemical engineering in 1922 and began his professional career at DuPont's Philadelphia plant. Two years later, he was transferred to the Experimental Station to participate in the company's groundbreaking work in high-pressure technology. Greenewalt's chemical engineering expertise was complemented by family ties to the du Ponts, most notably his marriage to the daughter of Irénée du Pont.

      In the sixteen months after the end of the Manhattan Project, Greenewalt served as Stine's assistant, assistant director of the Development Department, and assistant general manager of the Pigments Department. In June 1946, he became a vice president and member of the Executive Committee, and in January 1948 he succeeded Walter S. Carpenter as president. Greenewalt made the pursuit of large-scale research projects designed to produce "new nylons" DuPont's major postwar objective. As part of this push, he convinced DuPont's Executive Committee to spend $30 million on new research facilities and to fund university research programs. Between 1948 and 1962, Greenewalt oversaw the development of Orlon®, Dacron®, and Lycra® synthetic fibers. In the latter part of his presidency, DuPont also began to expand overseas, establishing the International Department to coordinate global ventures.

      By the late 1950s, however, DuPont had become overly reliant on textile fibers, faced slowing growth, and diminishing returns from textile research. In 1961 Greenewalt urged every department to focus on developing new markets and announced a program of diversification "beyond existing fields of interest and beyond chemistry." Greenewalt stepped down from the presidency the next year, but continued to advocate the development of new product lines until his retirement from the board of directors in 1988.

      Maybe he was working for the side he was raking the most cash from. The European operation was in temporary digs in Lisbon and Bern during the Manhatten Project and biz generally was in the toilet compared with the cash-cow US war economy.

  •  Recommend, Recommend, Recommend!! (none / 1)

    I consider myself pretty up on history and I never knew the extent of all this.  

    THANK YOU!

    "There have been tyrants and murderers and for a time they seem invincible but in the end, they always fall -- think of it, ALWAYS." - Gandhi

    by hopesprings on Sun Feb 27, 2005 at 05:05:04 PM PDT

  •  I had no idea of this plot (4.00 / 2)

    until I saw the movie "The Corporation,"
    a documentary about the evolution of the modern corporation facilitated by acheiving "personhood" and thus the protections of the Constitution and the Bill of Rights.  Much recommended -- just came out last summer.

    Great diary, too.

  •  What's interesting to me (none / 0)

    Is that the Marines are proud of Smedley Butler, you learn all about him in boot camp, but they never mention this or his book "War is a racket".
    •  It Goes Even Further... (none / 1)

      ...back before the revolution, in fact.

      George Washington assassinated the Sier du Jumonville in 1754, triggering the French & Indian War.  (He signed a confession.)  The thing was, he had been sent, basically, as a mercenary by some of the leading families of Virginia (the Fairfaxes, et. al.) with whom he had invested to secure land in the region near Fort Necessity (Western PA.)  The French and Indian War was started by Washington and he gained substantially for having done so.

      Likewise, there is considerable evidence that Abraham Lincoln, during the period before his inauguration, when a number of states had either seceded or were discussing it, was quoted as saying in reply to advice that he should simply let the South go: "Let the South go?  Let them go?  Where will I get my revenues??!!!

      Elihu Root, Theodore Roosevelt's Secretary of State, was counsel to the Sugar Trust in private law practice.  Amazing, then that the United States should trump up the Maine as the cassus belli to attack Cuba and lay claim to the Philippines, the two largest sugar producers on the planet.

      US involvement in World War I -- when England was short of everything and was losing -- was largely driven by zionists in Europe and America.  In return for their efforts, Lloyd George says in his memoirs that Britain signed the Balfour Declaration, creating a huge financial windfall for the Rothschilds.

      The Marine was right: so many countless deaths of fine brave young men (and this does not in any way dishonor their memory) for so many private financial interests.

      If I had a son, I would never let him put on the uniform; not without a complete overhaul of the United States.

      "The beginning of thought is in disagreement -- not only with others but also with ourselves." - Eric Hoffer www.InTheArena.bravehost.com

      by Thinking Republican on Sun Feb 27, 2005 at 06:08:17 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  Correction (none / 0)

        Not to be a pest, but just so people can Google properly. The spelling is "Sieur" not "Sier". His real name was