1. ian says:

    I see that the BBC hasn’t changed. A safe pair of hands as always.

  2. danceaway says:

    Thank for that newensign; I considered myself fortunate when I was able to purchase it not too long ago, but it would not surprise me if this is now much more difficult. As it is a very short book, downloading is a very reasonable alternative.

  3. pete fairhurst says:

    Another, very different, take on Butler


    “The argument I put forward here is very simple: The plausibility of the Business Plot rests on the assumption that Roosevelt’s policies went against the interests of bankers, industrialists and Wall Street financiers—or at least a very powerful subset of them (including the Morgans and DuPonts who were implicated in the plot). Implied is that his policies were so beyond the pale that he was nearly deposed or turned into a puppet of a fascist government controlled by the likes of J.P. Morgan, Jr. On top of that, we also need to believe that Smedley Butler was the kind of guy who would stand up to the powerful bankers and rat them out due to his “patriotism, integrity, and dedication to democracy.” But at the same time, we need to believe he’s the kind of guy the bankers would approach to lead the coup, even though by then he was already going around giving speeches condemning war profiteers, among them Morgan and DuPont, and exclaiming that “War is a Racket!”

    You can see the story is already starting to fall apart under its own internal contradictions before I’ve even started to show that none of these assumptions are true: Roosevelt’s policies were practically dictated by wealthy bankers, Wall Street financiers, and big business; and Smedley Butler was a big fat phony.

    The “business plot” was manufactured to make it appear to the public as if Roosevelt’s policies were really for the common good and not a big giveaway to bankers and industrialists. If they hated it enough to depose FDR, then it had to be good, right? By making people believe that a fascist coup was narrowly avoided, it gave the false impression that the country was not already a plutocracy fully controlled by Wall Street.”

    • ian says:

      Hi Pete, great comment. I got one of the books you suggested BTW. Really enjoying it.

      • pete fairhurst says:

        Thanks Ian
        Yes it is very revealing isn’t it. The first book is equally revealing too.
        I found both books to be tough to read because they reveal so much evil on behalf of our lords and masters. And both very well referenced from archived original sources too. Together they completely explode the standard WW1 narrative

    • ian says:

      Yes Pete there is a lot even from the very beginning With Robert Cecil promoting Balfour his nephew, which created the saying, “Bob’s your uncle”. I am enjoying it, though as you say, there’s a lot to take in. I’ll get the other one when I finish it. Thanks for the recommendation.