FTR #957 The National Front and Deep Politics in France, Part 2

With the loom­ing deci­sive sec­ond round in the French elec­tions, there is renewed scruti­ny on the Nation­al Front and its tit­u­lar head Marine Le Pen.

Net­worked with var­i­ous fig­ures rang­ing from the milieu of Don­ald Trump to that of Turk­ish pres­i­dent Erdo­gan, the Nation­al Front and the Le Pens (father Jean-Marie and daugh­ter Marine) are car­ry­ing on the fas­cist tra­di­tion in France.

The sec­ond of two shows, this pro­gram con­tin­ues our exam­i­na­tion of French deep pol­i­tics, scru­ti­niz­ing pow­er­ful eco­nom­ic and finan­cial arrange­ments that deter­mined the Fran­co-Ger­man polit­i­cal dynam­ic through­out most of the twen­ti­eth cen­tu­ry and, thus far, through the twen­ty-first as well.

Crit­i­cal to our under­stand­ing is the dynam­ic of occu­py­ing the high ground on both sides of a polit­i­cal divide. This pro­gram under­scores how this has placed Ger­many in a key strate­gic posi­tion on both sides of key polit­i­cal strug­gles: In the pre-World War II era and post­war era as well; In the right-left polit­i­cal divide in French pol­i­tics; In the strug­gle between anti-immi­grant/an­ti-Mus­lim advo­cates such as the Nation­al Front and Mus­lim-Broth­er­hood linked ele­ments in the Islamist com­mu­ni­ty.

Key ele­ments of dis­cus­sion include:

1. Review of Steve Ban­non’s ide­o­log­i­cal fond­ness for French anti-Semi­te and Vichy col­lab­o­ra­tionist Charles Mau­r­ras. Mau­r­ras’ Action Fran­caise is a direct antecedent of the Nation­al Front. ” . . . . One of the pri­ma­ry prog­en­i­tors of the par­ty was the Action Française, found­ed at the end of the 19th cen­tu­ry. . . .”

2. Review of the rela­tion­ship between for­mer pres­i­dent Fran­cois Mit­terand (a social­ist) and French Holo­caust imple­menter and Vichy police offi­cial Rene Bous­quet, who was close to Mit­terand and helped to finance his cam­paign and those of oth­er left-wing French politi­cians. With finan­cial influ­ence in left-wing par­ties, Ger­many can help moti­vate the French left to band togeth­er to defeat the French Nation­al Front and its anti-EU, anti-NATO ide­ol­o­gy. Poten­tial left­ists can also be chan­nelled into an anti-immi­grant/an­ti-Mus­lim posi­tion along that of the Nation­al Front. ” . . . . . . . The most damn­ing of all charges against Mit­ter­rand and his right wing con­nec­tions is prob­a­bly his long last­ing friend­ship with René Bous­quet, ex secré­taire général of the Vichy police. . . . In 1974, René Bous­quet gave finan­cial help to François Mit­ter­rand for his pres­i­den­tial cam­paign against Valéry Gis­card d’Es­taing. In an inter­view with Pierre Favier et Michel Mar­tin-Roland Mit­ter­rand claimed that he was not the only left wing politi­cian to ben­e­fit from Bous­quet’s mon­ey, as René Bous­quet helped finance all the prin­ci­pal left wing politi­cians from the 1950s to the begin­ning of the 1970s, includ­ing Pierre Mendès France. . . .”

3. Dis­cus­sion of Fran­cois Mit­terand’s pri­ma­ry role in estab­lish­ing the Euro, as a pre­req­ui­site for Ger­man reuni­fi­ca­tion (his alleged “fear” of a reuni­fied Ger­many should be tak­en with a grain of salt in light of his col­lab­o­ra­tionist back­ground and rela­tion­ship with Rene Bous­quet: ” . . . . He [Robert Zoel­lick] explained his under­stand­ing of how Europe got its com­mon cur­ren­cy. . . . it was very clear that Euro­pean mon­e­tary union result­ed from French-Ger­man ten­sions before uni­fi­ca­tion and was meant to calm Mitterrand’s fears of an all-too-pow­er­ful Ger­many. Accord­ing to Zoel­lick, the euro cur­ren­cy is a by-prod­uct of Ger­man uni­fi­ca­tion. . . . in strate­gic terms, Germany’s influ­ence has nev­er been greater. As the con­ti­nent wants to bank on Germany’s AAA rat­ing, Berlin can now effec­tive­ly dic­tate fis­cal pol­i­cy to Athens, Lis­bon and Rome – per­haps in the future to Paris, too. . .”

4. More about the Euro (launched with the crit­i­cal­ly impor­tant assis­tance of Fran­cois Mit­terand: “. . . . It [the euro] has turned the Ger­mans into the new rulers of Europe. And it has con­signed France to be the weak­er part­ner in the Fran­co-Ger­man rela­tion­ship. . . .”

5. Analy­sis of the deci­sive rela­tion­ship between French steel­mak­ers belong­ing to the Comite des Forges and their Ger­man coun­ter­parts and Ruhr coal pro­duc­ers, one of the foun­da­tion­al ele­ments of the Fifth Col­umn that is antecedent to the Nation­al Front: ” . . . . The strug­gle of the inter­war peri­od was not sim­ply a clash between French inter­ests on the one side and Ger­man inter­ests on the oth­er. Dur­ing the devel­op­ment of the Ruhr-Lor­raine indus­tri­al com­plex, like-mind­ed indus­tri­al­ists in France and Ger­many had become direc­tors of joint­ly owned and joint­ly con­trolled finan­cial, indus­tri­al, and dis­trib­ut­ing enter­pris­es. In many cas­es com­mon views on ques­tions of eco­nom­ic orga­ni­za­tion, labor pol­i­cy, social leg­is­la­tion, and atti­tude toward gov­ern­ment had been far more impor­tant to the indus­tri­al­ists than dif­fer­ences of nation­al­i­ty or cit­i­zen­ship. . . . ”

6. The eco­nom­ic col­lab­o­ra­tion between French and Ger­man oli­garchs worked to the advan­tage of Ger­many: ” . . . .It is curi­ous to note that only the French appeared to have this con­flict between pub­lic pol­i­cy and pri­vate activ­i­ties. On the Ger­man side, com­plete co-ordi­na­tion seems to have been pre­served between nation­al and pri­vate inter­ests; between offi­cials of the Ger­man Repub­lic and the lead­ers of Ger­man indus­try and finance. . . .”

7. Exem­pli­fy­ing the oper­a­tion of the pro-Ger­man Fifth Col­umn in the Ruhr-Lor­raine indus­tri­al com­plex is the rela­tion­ship between the De Wen­del and Rochling inter­ests: ” . . . . Dur­ing World War I the De Wen­dels, the influ­en­tial French-Ger­man bank­ing and indus­tri­al fam­i­ly which head­ed the French wing of the Inter­na­tion­al Steel Car­tel through their Comite des Forges and whose mem­bers had sat in the par­lia­ments of both France and Ger­many, were able to keep the French army from destroy­ing indus­tri­al plants belong­ing to the Ger­man enter­pris­es of the Rochling fam­i­ly. . . . . . . . The Rochling fam­i­ly, with their pow­er­ful com­plex of coal, iron, steel and bank­ing enter­pris­es in Ger­many, has for gen­er­a­tions played in close har­mo­ny with the de Wen­del fam­i­ly. . . .”

8. The De Wendel/Rochling links were so pro­found that the Rochlings were called upon to help build the French defen­sive Mag­inot Line: ” . . . . On the oth­er hand, as far as the French steel mak­ers’ asso­ci­a­tion, the Comite des Forges, and in par­tic­u­lar the de Wen­dels who head­ed the Comite, were con­cerned, it was busi­ness as usu­al-or in this case, busi­ness as unusu­al-that pre­vailed. . . . When it came time for France to build its impreg­nable Mag­inot Line, who should be called in to sup­ply steel and tech­ni­cal assis­tance but the Ger­man firm of the broth­ers Rochling. . . .”

9. After the French capit­u­la­tion, the Vichy government–to no one’s surprise–exonerated the Rochlings: ” . . . . Now comes the out­break of World War II. The French army march­ing into the Saar dur­ing the ‘pho­ny war’ peri­od in 1939, received orders not to fire on or dam­age the plants of the ‘war crim­i­nals,’ the broth­ers Rochling. In 1940 came the blitz and the fall of France. The Vichy gov­ern­ment passed a decree exon­er­at­ing the Rochlings and can­cel­ing their forty-year prison sen­tences. . . .”

10. The Fran­co-Ger­man steel car­tel, in turn, belonged to an inter­na­tion­al steel car­tel fea­tur­ing the Thyssen firm Vere­inigte Stahlw­erke (lat­er Thyssen A.G.). The Thyssen inter­ests are inex­tri­ca­bly linked with the Bor­mann cap­i­tal net­work. The Thyssens’ prin­ci­pal Amer­i­can con­tacts were the Bush fam­i­ly. ” . . . . They marked the for­ma­tion of the Unit­ed Steel Works in Ger­many, as a com­bi­na­tion of the four biggest steel pro­duc­ers Ernst Poens­gen, Fritz Thyssen, Otto Wolff, and the oth­ers who drew this com­bine togeth­er had man­aged to get over a hun­dred mil­lion dol­lars from pri­vate investors in the Unit­ed States. Dil­lon Read & Com­pa­ny, the New York invest­ment house which brought Clarence Dil­lon, James V. For­re­stal, William H. Drap­er, Jr., and oth­ers into promi­nence, float­ed the Unit­ed Steel Works bonds in the Unit­ed States . . . . ”

11. Dur­ing the occu­pa­tion of France, the Fran­co-Ger­man cor­po­rate con­nec­tion yield­ed fur­ther Ger­man cap­i­tal dom­i­na­tion of French firms: ” . . . The Third Repub­lic’s busi­ness elite was vir­tu­al­ly unchanged after 1940. . . . They regard­ed the war and Hitler as an unfor­tu­nate diver­sion from their chief mis­sion of pre­vent­ing a com­mu­nist rev­o­lu­tion in France. Anti­bol­she­vism was a com­mon denom­i­na­tor link­ing these French­men to Ger­mans. . . . The upper-class men who had been superbly trained in finance and admin­is­tra­tion at one of the two grand corps schools were referred to as France’s per­ma­nent ‘wall of mon­ey,’ and as pro­fes­sion­als they came into their own in 1940. They agreed to the estab­lish­ment of Ger­man sub­sidiary firms in France and per­mit­ted a gen­er­al buy-in to French com­pa­nies. . . .

12. The Fran­co-Ger­man cor­po­rate links and the dom­i­na­tion of that rela­tion­ship by cor­po­rate Ger­many and the Bor­mann net­work con­tin­ued into the post­war peri­od: ” . . . . Soci­ety’s nat­ur­al sur­vivors, French ver­sion, who had served the Third Reich as an exten­sion of Ger­man indus­try, would con­tin­ue to do so in the peri­od of post­war tri­als, just as they had sur­vived the war, occu­pa­tion, and lib­er­a­tion. These were many of the French elite, the well-born, the prop­er­tied, the titled, the experts, indus­tri­al­ists, busi­ness­men, bureau­crats, bankers. . . . Eco­nom­ic col­lab­o­ra­tion in France with the Ger­mans had been so wide­spread (on all lev­els of soci­ety) that there had to be a real­iza­tion that an entire nation could not be brought to tri­al. . . .”

13. Cor­po­rate German/Bormann con­trol of French com­merce and finance is the deter­min­ing fac­tor in con­tem­po­rary French affairs: ” . . . . The under­stand­ings arrived at in the pow­er struc­ture of France reach back to pre­war days, were con­tin­ued dur­ing the occu­pa­tion, and have car­ried over to the present time. [New York Times reporter Flo­ra] Lewis, in her report from Paris, com­ment­ed fur­ther: ‘This hid­den con­trol of gov­ern­ment and cor­po­ra­tions has pro­duced a gen­er­al unease in Paris.’ Along with the unease, the fact that France has lin­ger­ing and seri­ous social and polit­i­cal ail­ments is a residue of World War II and of an eco­nom­ic occu­pa­tion that was nev­er real­ly ter­mi­nat­ed with the with­draw­al of Ger­man troops beyond the Rhine. . . .”

14. The Fran­co-Ger­man cor­po­rate Axis facil­i­tat­ed the De Wen­del fam­i­ly’s post­war assis­tance of Friedrich Flick, anoth­er of Hitler’s top indus­tri­al­ists.: ” . . . . The under­stand­ings arrived at in the pow­er struc­ture of France reach back to pre­war days, were con­tin­ued dur­ing the occu­pa­tion, and have car­ried over to the present time. Lewis, in her report from Paris, com­ment­ed fur­ther: ‘This hid­den con­trol of gov­ern­ment and cor­po­ra­tions has pro­duced a gen­er­al unease in Paris.’ Along with the unease, the fact that France has lin­ger­ing and seri­ous social and polit­i­cal ail­ments is a residue of World War II and of an eco­nom­ic occu­pa­tion that was nev­er real­ly ter­mi­nat­ed with the with­draw­al of Ger­man troops beyond the Rhine. . . .”

15. The seam­less incor­po­ra­tion of the Fran­co-Ger­man cor­po­rate axis into the Ger­man-dom­i­nat­ed EU and EMU has yield­ed the abil­i­ty of the Fed­er­al Repub­lic to inter­fere in the French polit­i­cal process: ” . . . . Like Fil­lon, Macron is con­sid­ered ‘Ger­many-com­pat­i­ble’ by a Ger­man think tank, where­as all oth­er can­di­dates are viewed as unsuit­able for ‘con­struc­tive coop­er­a­tion’ because of their crit­i­cism of the EU and/or of NATO. Recent­ly, Ger­many’s Finance Min­is­ter Wolf­gang Schäu­ble osten­ta­tious­ly rec­om­mend­ed vot­ing for Macron. Berlin’s inter­fer­ence on behalf of Macron shows once again that Ger­man dom­i­na­tion of the EU does not stop at nation­al bor­ders, and — accord­ing to a well-known EU observ­er — sur­pass­es by far Rus­si­a’s fee­ble med­dling in France. . . .”

The pro­gram con­cludes with rumi­na­tion about the role of anti-Mus­lim sen­ti­ment in the French and U.S. polit­i­cal process and the pres­ence of Under­ground Reich-linked ele­ments on both the “anti-immi­grant” side and the Islamist/Muslim Broth­er­hood side.

Pro­gram High­lights Include:

1. Review of the Islamist/Muslim Broth­er­hood Turk­ish Refah Par­ty (the direct antecedent of Erdo­gan’s AKP) and its rela­tion­ship to Ahmed Huber of the Bank Al-Taqwa.

2. Review of the role of Ahmed Huber (lat­er of the Bank Al-Taqwa) in intro­duc­ing Turk­ish Mus­lim Broth­er­hood’s Necmet­tin Erbakan with Marine Le Pen’s father: ” . . . . . . . . A sec­ond pho­to­graph, in which Hitler is talk­ing with Himm­ler, hangs next to those of Necmet­tin Erbakan and Jean-Marie Le Pen [leader of the fas­cist Nation­al Front]. Erbakan, head of the Turk­ish Islamist par­ty, Refah, turned to Achmed Huber for an intro­duc­tion to the chief of the French par­ty of the far right. Exit­ing from the meet­ing . . . . Huber’s two friends sup­pos­ed­ly stat­ed that they ‘share the same view of the world’ and expressed ‘their com­mon desire to work togeth­er to remove the last racist obsta­cles that still pre­vent the union of the Islamist move­ment with the nation­al right of Europe.’. . .”

3. Review of The Camp of the Saints, a racist, anti-immi­grant book val­ued both by French Nation­al Front types and Trump advi­sor Steve Ban­non.

Germany, Greece and Franco’s Blue Division

Wolf­gang Schauble (Ger­many’s Finance Min­is­ter) has stat­ed that Ger­many need­n’t repay the bil­lions it stole from Greece dur­ing World War II, because a gov­ern­ment is not oblig­at­ed to ful­fill the pledges of pre­vi­ous regimes. The fact that Ger­many con­tin­ues to pay pen­sions to vet­er­ans of Spain’s Blue Divi­sion (which fought on the East­ern Front dur­ing World War II) sug­gests that the Ger­man gov­ern­men­t’s judg­ments are self-serv­ing­ly selec­tive. All of the con­tents of this web­site as of 12/19/2014–Dave Emory’s 35+ years of research and broadcasting–as well as hours of video­taped lec­tures are avail­able on a 32GB flash dri­ve. Dave offers his pro­grams and arti­cles for free–your sup­port is very much appre­ci­at­ed.

Analyzing “Clausewitzian Economics”: Greek Politician Compares German Economic Hegemony to WWII

In past pro­grams, we exam­ined the Greek and Euro­zone debt crises in the con­text of the the­o­ries of Friedrich List and Carl von Clause­witz, as well as the real­iza­tion of those the­o­ries through suc­cess­ful manip­u­la­tion of the transna­tion­al cor­po­rate land­scape through both world wars and the “post­wars” that fol­lowed them. Recent­ly, a the Greek may­or of Cor­fu encap­su­lat­ed that devel­op­ment rather suc­cinct­ly: “What they didn’t man­age in World War II they are man­ag­ing now,” Kostas Nikolouzos, the left-wing may­or of Cor­fu, said of Ger­many, voic­ing a com­mon sen­ti­ment. “It may sound extreme, but it’s true.” All of the con­tents of this web­site as of 12/19/2014–Dave Emory’s 35+ years of research and broadcasting–as well as hours of video­taped lec­tures are avail­able on a 32GB flash dri­ve. Dave offers his pro­grams and arti­cles for free–your sup­port is very much appre­ci­at­ed.

FTR #861 Greek Tragedy, Part 4

Con­tin­u­ing our analy­sis of the Greek eco­nom­ic and polit­i­cal cri­sis, we begin with review of Greece and the late stages of World War II. The occu­py­ing British turned on the par­ti­sans who had played a large part in the defeat of Axis occu­pa­tion forces, set­ting the stage for a bru­tal civ­il war. Much of the pro­gram cen­ters on the fire-sale of major Greek infra­struc­ture, includ­ing the takeover of 14 region­al air­ports by a Ger­man cor­po­ra­tion. Much of Greek infra­struc­ture is now up for sale, includ­ing infra­struc­ture that is essen­tial for the recon­struc­tion of the econ­o­my of Greece. Hav­ing fig­ured sig­nif­i­cant­ly in the devel­op­ment of Greek debt, a num­ber of Ger­man busi­ness­men are now fugi­tives from Greek jus­tice, seek­ing to avoid pros­e­cu­tion for cor­rup­tion charges. After not­ing that Greek debt is actu­al­ly LOWER than Ger­man debt when cal­cu­lat­ed using a stan­dard account­ing scale, the pro­gram notes the pro­pos­al to have Greek youth work for free, in order to relieve the mas­sive youth unem­ploy­ment plagu­ing that coun­try. Record­ed on Labor Day week­end of 2015, the pro­gram con­cludes with rumi­na­tion con­cern­ing the past and future of slav­ery, scru­ti­nized against the back­ground of recent and future events.

German Company Buys Greek Airports

“. . . In the ear­ly 1980s, as Chair of the Asso­ci­a­tion of Euro­pean Bor­der Regions (AEBR), [Ger­man Finance Min­is­ter Wolf­gang] Schäu­ble had orga­nized the first eco­nom­ic ini­tia­tives [and not just] toward France. Theodor Veit­er, a for­mer Nazi spe­cial­ist for bor­der sub­ver­sion, was one of Schäuble’s advi­sors as chair of the AEBR. . . .” It is against this back­ground that we exam­ine the pur­chase of Greek region­al air­ports by a Ger­man com­pa­ny. All of the con­tents of this web­site as of 12/19/2014–Dave Emory’s 35+ years of research and broadcasting–as well as hours of video­taped lec­tures are avail­able on a 32GB flash dri­ve. Dave offers his pro­grams and arti­cles for free–your sup­port is very much appre­ci­at­ed.

FTR #855: Greek Tragedy, Part 3

Fol­low­ing Ger­many’s imple­men­ta­tion of an aus­ter­i­ty pro­gram on Greece that offi­cial­ly and as a mat­ter of course negates Greek nation­al sov­er­eign­ty and democ­ra­cy, we exam­ine that agree­ment and the his­to­ry that led up to it. Even rel­a­tive­ly con­ser­v­a­tive Amer­i­can and Euro­pean observers are label­ing the devel­op­ment a “coup” against Greek democ­ra­cy. We would call it a for­eign occu­pa­tion by Ger­many. The events in Europe can only be under­stood in terms of the exe­cu­tion of a con­sum­mate­ly bril­liant, cyn­i­cal plan to imple­ment Ger­man polit­i­cal and eco­nom­ic hege­mo­ny through a series of wars and what Von Clause­witz called “Post-wars.” The con­ti­nu­ity of Ger­man polit­i­cal, mil­i­tary and eco­nom­ic pol­i­cy through decades and across a chal­leng­ing diver­si­ty of events is far-sight­ed and rig­or­ous. Pro­gram High­lights Include: Ger­man Finance Min­is­ter Wolf­gang Schauble’s use of Third Reich cross-bor­der sub­ver­sion spe­cial­ist Theodor Veit­er as a key advis­er on Euro­pean eco­nom­ic affairs; the explic­it con­trol of Greece’s eco­nom­ic affairs by “the insti­tu­tions” [of Ger­many and the EU]; Schauble’s appar­ent goal of dri­ving Greece out of the Euro­zone; Ger­many’s suc­cess­ful eva­sion of its World War II debt; an overview of the evo­lu­tion of Friedrich List’s blue­print for eco­nom­ic and polit­i­cal con­trol of Europe and the world; review of the troika’s impo­si­tion of a 2011 Greek coali­tion gov­ern­ment that includ­ed the fas­cist LAOS par­ty; the fun­da­men­tal­ly dif­fer­ent approach of Ger­man cor­po­ra­tions to car­tel agree­ments from that of their inter­na­tion­al partners/competitors.

Lucy Komisar vs. Wolfgang Schauble

At a recent address by Ger­man Finance Min­is­ter Wolf­gang Schauble (giv­en to the Coun­cil on For­eign Rela­tions) Lucy Komis­ar braced the vet­er­an politi­cian over Ger­many’s hypocrisy con­cern­ing Greek debt. Schauble’s equiv­o­ca­tion on the issue did not shake Lucy’s efforts to pin him down. In a linked arti­cle, do note the obser­va­tions of Albrecht Ritschl, pro­fes­sor of eco­nom­ic his­to­ry at the Lon­don School of Eco­nom­ics, who dis­cussed Ger­many’s debt: ” . . . . “If we accept that Germany’s nation­al prod­uct is some­where to the tune of over 2 tril­lion euros, which is beyond 2.5 tril­lion U.S. dol­lars, we would be talk­ing about a default and debt for­give­ness of some­where in the range of 10 tril­lion dol­lars. I would tend to think that this is prob­a­bly unri­valed in 20th cen­tu­ry his­to­ry. . . . .” All of the con­tents of this web­site as of 12/19/2014–Dave Emory’s 35+ years of research and broadcasting–as well as hours of video­taped lec­tures are avail­able on a 32GB flash dri­ve. Dave offers his pro­grams and arti­cles for free–your sup­port is very much appre­ci­at­ed.

Greek Prime Minister Continues to Pursue World War II Reparations from Germany

As dis­cussed in FTR #788, Ger­many has NOT reim­bursed Greece for the enor­mous dam­age wrought dur­ing World War II. Once again, that pur­loined wealth and the Bor­mann cap­i­tal net­work that was the vehi­cle for the rein­vest­ment of the Nazis’ World War II loot is cen­ter stage. Greek Prime Min­is­ter Alex­is Tsir­pas is demand­ing that the mon­ey be repaid. Tsir­pas’ demand focus­es atten­tion on a dynam­ic that lies at the foun­da­tion of 20th and 21st cap­i­tal flows. All of the con­tents of this web­site as of 12/19/2014–Dave Emory’s 35+ years of research and broadcasting–as well as hours of video­taped lec­tures are avail­able on a 32GB flash dri­ve. Dave offers his pro­grams and arti­cles for free–your sup­port is very much appre­ci­at­ed.

Ghosts of World War II and the Greek Economic Crisis

In FTR #746 and FTR #788, we ana­lyzed the Greek eco­nom­ic cri­sis, the EMU and “Clause­witz­ian Eco­nom­ics.” As Greece and Ger­many square off fol­low­ing the elec­tion of a left-wing coali­tion gov­ern­ment in the for­mer, the ghosts of World War II are mate­ri­al­iz­ing in fright­en­ing and dra­mat­ic fash­ion. The new Greek finance min­is­ter has not­ed the rise of Nazism in Greece as a result of the eco­nom­ic and social depri­va­tion stem­ming from the aus­ter­i­ty doc­trine. There also remains the pos­si­bil­i­ty of rais­ing the specter of Ger­many’s unpaid World War II debt to Greece, there­by cit­ing the eco­nom­ic and polit­i­cal dynam­ics inher­ent in the Bor­mann cap­i­tal net­work, about which we speak so often. All of the con­tents of this web­site as of 12/19/2014–Dave Emory’s 35+ years of research and broadcasting–as well as hours of video­taped lec­tures are avail­able on a 32GB flash dri­ve. Dave offers his pro­grams and arti­cles for free–your sup­port is very much appre­ci­at­ed.

FTR #810 A Prince Too Far

Pop con­spir­a­cy the­o­ry casts the Bilder­berg­er group in a sen­sa­tion­al­ist, polit­i­cal­ly and his­tor­i­cal­ly illit­er­ate “New World Order” con­text. In this broad­cast, we exam­ine the his­to­ry of Prince Bern­hard, the for­mer SS offi­cer and I.G. Far­ben spy who found­ed the group, against the back­ground of the Bat­tle of Arn­hem (Oper­a­tion Mar­ket Gar­den) in Sep­tem­ber of 1944. As head of the Dutch “resis­tance,” appar­ent dou­ble agent Bern­hard sac­ri­ficed a resis­tance fight­er named Chris­t­ian Lin­de­mans (code named “King Kong”), who took the blame for the delib­er­ate betray­al of the Allied bat­tle plan. Sab­o­tage of the Arn­hem oper­a­tion has also been part­ly attrib­uted to Peter Car­ring­ton (lat­er Lord Car­ring­ton and for­mer British For­eign Sec­re­tary dur­ing the run-up to the Fal­ka­lands War.) Attacked for his stun­ning lack of insight with regard to the Argen­tine fas­cist jun­ta’s inva­sion of those islands, Car­ring­ton has nev­er been prop­er­ly vet­ted with regard to the betray­al of part of the British bat­tle plan for the Fal­ka­lnds cam­paign. The pro­gram also exam­ines the fas­cist activ­i­ties and involve­ments of Bern­hard’s heirs in the Roy­al Fam­i­ly of the Nether­lands.