Monthly Archives: March 2016

Alien Technology and the Unfortunate Death of A Witness

~

mkultra6

~

mkultra7

~

CLICK HERE TO LISTEN TO INTERVIEW OF STEVEN GREER BY ART BELL REGARDING THE DEATH OF WILLIAM COLBY, FORMER CIA DIRECTOR.

Steven Greer (from disclosureproject.org) reveals to Art Bell the circumstances surrounding William Colby’s death. This interview is from August 8th 2004. The following is a transcript of the part of the interview that is available here as a streaming mp3 file:
Now, I want to talk about an assassination tonight that people may not want to hear, but it’s very similar to what was portrayed in “The Manchurian Candidate” when this Senator is killed while he’s out kayaking on the Chesapeake Bay. I’m referring now to a very brave man, CIA Director Bill Colby, whose very dearest friend approached us in the mid-90s. And the week that we were going to have a meeting – listen carefully — the week we were going to have a meeting with this former CIA Director who had been on the inside of these covert operations, where he was going to transfer to our group $50 million in funding…

AB: What?

SG: …as well as existing extraterrestrial energy devices that were functional. They found him floating down the Potomac River. The colonel…

AB: Wait, wait wait…

SG: …The colonel who set up this meeting came to the funeral of my right hand aide, Shari Adamiak, who died a few years ago, and said, “We have both had grievous losses, but we can’t look back. We’ve got to move forward.” And this was Bill Colby’s best friend.

AB: Under what arrangement – how did, I mean, $50 million, for example – under what auspices, how was that going to happen?

SG: We never got that far, nor did Mr. Colby. My point is this, and I’m not saying this to disturb Bill Colby’s family, but I’ve decided that the truth has got to come out on some of these things, including these illegal, rogue operations that would phone in a threat like this to a civilian medical doctor.

AB: Um Hmm

SG: I’ve never signed a national security oath, and those people who have who are listening, mark my words, go to our website – DisclosureProject.org – and contact me, because as far as I’m concerned, the actions taken by this group make them ineligible to cite the National Security Act of 1947 or any other constitutionally approved law because they are operating as an illegal, extra-constitutional entity.

AB: Got it. All right, Dr. Greer, hold tight. In the middle of the night, you’re listening to Coast to Coast A.M. and I bet you had never heard any of this before from Dr. Greer.

[commercial break]

AB: Just to be sure that we all heard this correctly. Let’s have Dr. Greer go over this one more time. A – uh- murder, Dr. Greer? You’re saying a murder.

SG: Yes.

AB: Uh. And the set up to this was?

SG: Well, I’m – my group was approached by a colonel who I do not want to name, who was Bill Colby’s (one of his very best) friends, and they had been following what we were doing in the early and mid nineties with what was then called Project Starlight, which then became DisclosureProject.org. But this man approached a member of our Board of Directors, a very dear friend of mine, and said that there was this person who is very connected up and historically had been connected to these projects, who absolutely agreed that it was time to end the secrecy. He wanted to transfer to us the means to do so through some assets that he had access to and I was told specifically that there was a – he wanted to be sure that there was adequate funding to do it properly which was around $50 million (which is a rounding error on the $7 trillion oil economy) and that they had some devices and physical equipment that they wanted to also transfer so that we could get this disclosed and get it secured and out to the public. So there was a “cell” if you want to look at it that way, that was headed up, that had some involvement from Mr. Colby that wanted to do this. So, the meeting was set up between a member of my Board and Bill Colby, and the week that that meeting was to be actuated, he was found floating down the Potomac River. Now, what’s interesting about the death of Bill Colby was that, even his wife got on CNN and said “Oh, this is very unlike Bill Colby.” Because he was a very safe canoer. He left the house opened, he left the computer on, the coffee maker on, and all this. This was actually publicly and very briefly stated, but then, of course, it was written off as an “accidental” drowning while he was out canoeing on the Potomac River.

AB: I recall.

SG: Now, in reality, it’s very much like what’s being portrayed where art now is imitating life in “The Manchurian Candidate”, where there is a Senator who was going to blow the whistle on this transnational group that was running all this and he is murdered by this manchurian candidate in the Chesapeake Bay when he’s out kayaking and it’s made to look like a drowning accident and is reported out through the media shills (of course, most of the Big Media are shills for these kind of guys, or just extremely naive), as an accidental drowning. So what’s interesting is that this is precisely what happened to Bill Colby, and I’ve said this to a number of people who are actually in the media. And when my wife and I were sitting there looking at this movie, “The Manchurian Candidate,” we were stunned. We looked at each other and went “Oh, my god!” because my wife, of course, knew in real time as this event happened and, of course, it was tragic and we were heartbroken, and of course, not long after that, my right hand assistant and best friend in all these efforts, Shari Adamiak was – uh, she died – and this colonel came to her wake that was held at her apartment in Denver and he just came up to me and he said, “You know, of course, Bill Colby was killed trying to get the truth out on this to help us, and you guys have had your own losses, but we can’t look back, we can’t dwell on the negative. We can’t look back. We have to move forward.” And that’s my message to people, that’s always how we have to –

AB: I know, but if you believe what you just told me, then –

SG: It’s not a belief. I know it’s true, I mean I know it…

AB: Okay, if you know it’s true what you just told me, then that means they will kill to prevent any really serious damage. They will kill to stop any really serious damage. Therefore –

SG: If they can get away with it. Remember, those were the early days. We didn’t have the systems we have in place today.

AB: Doctor, if they can get away with killing a former CIA director, they can sure get away with killing an emergency room doctor.

SG: Well, perhaps. But, except, I’m – he was doing this in a very clandestine way. I am not doing what I’m doing in a clandestine way.

AB: True enough.

SG: And, the other thing to remember is that we’re much more sophisticated now than we were back in the mid 90s when this happened. We have enormous support within some of the groups that are running these covert projects who want to see this happen and I don’t lose any sleep. I don’t lose one minute of sleep over this, and none of the military witnesses working with me should. Now, it’s not to say it’s risk-free. You know, one of the things I say to people is that my god, you know, when I leave here to go back to my hotel here at Mt. Shasta, I could be hit by a Mack truck out of control coming down the mountain and be killed. There are risks with everything we do. But you also have to look at the benefit. If we’re being visited by intelligent life out there, and if there are covert programs that are sitting on technologies that could give us an entirely sustainable, long-term civilization without the need for damaging the environment, without the need for 80% of the world’s population living in abject poverty, is it not worth some risk? Well, it is! Now, I mean, I hate to sound clinical about this like a doctor talking about the risk and benefit ratios, but in reality, that’s what it really comes down to, isn’t it? And if we’re not willing to step up to the plate on something of this importance, then we’re really not worth breathing the free air of Earth.

AB: I’m with you. I’m certainly with you.

SG: I mean, this is why you’re so great for doing this kind of show and letting someone like me talk to millions of people about what’s really going on.
Also, John DeCamp (author of The Franklin Coverup: http://mirrors.wordsforgood.org/educate-yourself.org/cn/franklincoverupexcerpt.shtml and one of Bill Colby’s best friends, talks about their involvement with investigating a scandal in Nebraska in the late 80s that led to uncovering a very rogue and sophisticated pedophile ring that used orphan kids, runaways and also abducted children in a network of extremely corrupt activity. This includes child prostitution and sex parties in Washington DC involving prominent politicians, businessmen and media personalities; drug trafficking; CIA operated “mind control” experiments, conducted in Offutt U.S. Air Force Base near Omaha. John DeCamp also reveals a conversation he had with Bill Colby 2 weeks before his mysterious death. Colby tells John what he had been up to and what he was going to continue to do to help the world with his specific expertise and integrity.

~

~

Nervous System Manipulation by Electromagnetic Fields From Monitors

~

mkultratvbrainwashing2

~

Abstract
Physiological effects have been observed in a human subject in response to stimulation of the skin with weak electromagnetic fields that are pulsed with certain frequencies near ½ Hz or 2.4 Hz, such as to excite a sensory resonance. Many computer monitors and TV tubes, when displaying pulsed images, emit pulsed electromagnetic fields of sufficient amplitudes to cause such excitation. It is therefore possible to manipulate the nervous system of a subject by pulsing images displayed on a nearby computer monitor or TV set. For the latter, the image pulsing may be imbedded in the program material, or it may be overlaid by modulating a video stream, either as an RF signal or as a video signal. The image displayed on a computer monitor may be pulsed effectively by a simple computer program. For certain monitors, pulsed electromagnetic fields capable of exciting sensory resonances in nearby subjects may be generated even as the displayed images are pulsed with subliminal intensity.
~
Description

BACKGROUND OF THE INVENTIONThe invention relates to the stimulation of the human nervous system by an electromagnetic field applied externally to the body. A neurological effect of external electric fields has been mentioned by Wiener (1958), in a discussion of the bunching of brain waves through nonlinear interactions. The electric field was arranged to provide “a direct electrical driving of the brain”. Wiener describes the field as set up by a 10 Hz alternating voltage of 400 V applied in a room between ceiling and ground. Brennan (1992) describes in U.S. Pat. No. 5,169,380 an apparatus for alleviating disruptions in circadian rythms of a mammal, in which an alternating electric field is applied across the head of the subject by two electrodes placed a short distance from the skin.

A device involving a field electrode as well as a contact electrode is the “Graham Potentializer” mentioned by Hutchison (1991). This relaxation device uses motion, light and sound as well as an alternating electric field applied mainly to the head. The contact electrode is a metal bar in Ohmic contact with the bare feet of the subject, and the field electrode is a hemispherical metal headpiece placed several inches from the subject’s head.

In these three electric stimulation methods the external electric field is applied predominantly to the head, so that electric currents are induced in the brain in the physical manner governed by electrodynamics. Such currents can be largely avoided by applying the field not to the head, but rather to skin areas away from the head. Certain cutaneous receptors may then be stimulated and they would provide a signal input into the brain along the natural pathways of afferent nerves. It has been found that, indeed, physiological effects can be induced in this manner by very weak electric fields, if they are pulsed with a frequency near ½ Hz. The observed effects include ptosis of the eyelids, relaxation, drowziness, the feeling of pressure at a centered spot on the lower edge of the brow, seeing moving patterns of dark purple and greenish yellow with the eyes closed, a tonic smile, a tense feeling in the stomach, sudden loose stool, and sexual excitement, depending on the precise frequency used, and the skin area to which the field is applied. The sharp frequency dependence suggests involvement of a resonance mechanism.

It has been found that the resonance can be excited not only by externally applied pulsed electric fields, as discussed in U.S. Pat. Nos. 5,782,874, 5,899,922, 6,081,744, and 6,167,304, but also by pulsed magnetic fields, as described in U.S. Pat. Nos. 5,935,054 and 6,238,333, by weak heat pulses applied to the skin, as discussed in U.S. Pat. Nos. 5,800,481 and 6,091,994, and by subliminal acoustic pulses, as described in U.S. Pat. No. 6,017,302. Since the resonance is excited through sensory pathways, it is called a sensory resonance. In addition to the resonance near ½ Hz, a sensory resonance has been found near 2.4 Hz. The latter is characterized by the slowing of certain cortical processes, as discussed in the ‘481, ‘922, ‘302, ‘744, ‘944, and ‘304 patents.

The excitation of sensory resonances through weak heat pulses applied to the skin provides a clue about what is going on neurologically. Cutaneous temperature-sensing receptors are known to fire spontaneously. These nerves spike somewhat randomly around an average rate that depends on skin temperature. Weak heat pulses delivered to the skin in periodic fashion will therefore cause a slight frequency modulation (fm) in the spike patterns generated by the nerves. Since stimulation through other sensory modalities results in similar physiological effects, it is believed that frequency modulation of spontaneous afferent neural spiking patterns occurs there as well.

It is instructive to apply this notion to the stimulation by weak electric field pulses administered to the skin. The externally generated fields induce electric current pulses in the underlying tissue, but the current density is much too small for firing an otherwise quiescent nerve. However, in experiments with adapting stretch receptors of the crayfish, Terzuolo and Bullock (1956) have observed that very small electric fields can suffice for modulating the firing of already active nerves. Such a modulation may occur in the electric field stimulation under discussion.

Further understanding may be gained by considering the electric charges that accumulate on the skin as a result of the induced tissue currents. Ignoring thermodynamics, one would expect the accumulated polarization charges to be confined strictly to the outer surface of the skin. But charge density is caused by a slight excess in positive or negative ions, and thermal motion distributes the ions through a thin layer. This implies that the externally applied electric field actually penetrates a short distance into the tissue, instead of stopping abruptly at the outer skin surface. In this manner a considerable fraction of the applied field may be brought to bear on some cutaneous nerve endings, so that a slight modulation of the type noted by Terzuolo and Bullock may indeed occur.

The mentioned physiological effects are observed only when the strength of the electric field on the skin lies in a certain range, called the effective intensity window. There also is a bulk effect, in that weaker fields suffice when the field is applied to a larger skin area. These effects are discussed in detail in the ‘922 patent.

Since the spontaneous spiking of the nerves is rather random and the frequency modulation induced by the pulsed field is very shallow, the signal to noise ratio (S/N) for the fm signal contained in the spike trains along the afferent nerves is so small as to make recovery of the fm signal from a single nerve fiber impossibile. But application of the field over a large skin area causes simultaneous stimulation of many cutaneous nerves, and the fm modulation is then coherent from nerve to nerve. Therefore, if the afferent signals are somehow summed in the brain, the fm modulations add while the spikes from different nerves mix and interlace. In this manner the S/N can be increased by appropriate neural processing. The matter is discussed in detail in the ‘874 patent. Another increase in sensitivity is due to involving a resonance mechanism, wherein considerable neural circuit oscillations can result from weak excitations.

An easily detectable physiological effect of an excited ½ Hz sensory resonance is ptosis of the eyelids. As discussed in the ‘922 patent, the ptosis test involves first closing the eyes about half way. Holding this eyelid position, the eyes are rolled upward, while giving up voluntary control of the eyelids. The eyelid position is then determined by the state of the autonomic nervous system. Furthermore, the pressure excerted on the eyeballs by the partially closed eyelids increases parasympathetic activity. The eyelid position thereby becomes somewhat labile, as manifested by a slight flutter. The labile state is sensitive to very small shifts in autonomic state. The ptosis influences the extent to which the pupil is hooded by the eyelid, and thus how much light is admitted to the eye. Hence, the depth of the ptosis is seen by the subject, and can be graded on a scale from 0 to 10.

In the initial stages of the excitation of the ½ Hz sensory resonance, a downward drift is detected in the ptosis frequency, defined as the stimulation frequency for which maximum ptosis is obtained. This drift is believed to be caused by changes in the chemical milieu of the resonating neural circuits. It is thought that the resonance causes perturbations of chemical concentrations somewhere in the brain, and that these perturbations spread by diffusion to nearby resonating circuits. This effect, called “chemical detuning”, can be so strong that ptosis is lost altogether when the stimulation frequency is kept constant in the initial stages of the excitation. Since the stimulation then falls somewhat out of tune, the resonance decreases in amplitude and chemical detuning eventually diminishes. This causes the ptosis frequency to shift back up, so that the stimulation is more in tune and the ptosis can develop again. As a result, for fixed stimulation frequencies in a certain range, the ptosis slowly cycles with a frequency of several minutes. The matter is discussed in the ‘302 patent.

The stimulation frequencies at which specific physiological effects occur depend somewhat on the autonomic nervous system state, and probably on the endocrine state as well.

Weak magnetic fields that are pulsed with a sensory resonance frequency can induce the same physiological effects as pulsed electric fields. Unlike the latter however, the magnetic fields penetrate biological tissue with nearly undiminished strength. Eddy currents in the tissue drive electric charges to the skin, where the charge distributions are subject to thermal smearing in much the same way as in electric field stimulation, so that the same physiological effects develop. Details are discussed in the ‘054 patent.

~

Claims(14)

I claim:

1. A method for manipulating the nervous system of a subject located near a monitor, the monitor emitting an electromagnetic field when displaying an image by virtue of the physical display process, the subject having a sensory resonance frequency, the method comprising:
creating a video signal for displaying an image on the monitor, the image having an intensity;
modulating the video signal for pulsing the image intensity with a frequency in the range 0.1 Hz to 15 Hz; and
setting the pulse frequency to the resonance frequency.
2. A computer program for manipulating the nervous system of a subject located near a monitor, the monitor emitting an electromagnetic field when displaying an image by virtue of the physical display process, the subject having cutaneous nerves that fire spontaneously and have spiking patterns, the computer program comprising:
a display routine for displaying an image on the monitor, the image having an intensity;
a pulse routine for pulsing the image intensity with a frequency in the range 0.1 Hz to 15 Hz; and
a frequency routine that can be internally controlled by the subject, for setting the frequency;
whereby the emitted electromagnetic field is pulsed, the cutaneous nerves are exposed to the pulsed electromagnetic field, and the spiking patterns of the nerves acquire a frequency modulation.
3. The computer program of claim 2, wherein the pulsing has an amplitude and the program further comprises an amplitude routine for control of the amplitude by the subject.
4. The computer program of claim 2, wherein the pulse routine comprises:
a timing procedure for timing the pulsing; and
an extrapolation procedure for improving the accuracy of the timing procedure.
5. The computer program of claim 2, further comprising a variability routine for introducing variability in the pulsing.
6. Hardware means for manipulating the nervous system of a subject located near a monitor, the monitor being responsive to a video stream and emitting an electromagnetic field when displaying an image by virtue of the physical display process, the image having an intensity, the subject having cutaneous nerves that fire spontaneously and have spiking patterns, the hardware means comprising:
pulse generator for generating voltage pulses;
means, responsive to the voltage pulses, for modulating the video stream to pulse the image intensity;
whereby the emitted electromagnetic field is pulsed, the cutaneous nerves are exposed to the pulsed electromagnetic field, and the spiking patterns of the nerves acquire a frequency modulation.
7. The hardware means of claim 6, wherein the video stream is a composite video signal that has a pseudo-dc level, and the means for modulating the video stream comprise means for pulsing the pseudo-dc level.
8. The hardware means of claim 6, wherein the video stream is a television broadcast signal, and the means for modulating the video stream comprise means for frequency wobbling of the television broadcast signal.
9. The hardware means of claim 6, wherein the monitor has a brightness adjustment terminal, and the means for modulating the video stream comprise a connection from the pulse generator to the brightness adjustment terminal.
10. A source of video stream for manipulating the nervous system of a subject located near a monitor, the monitor emitting an electromagnetic field when displaying an image by virtue of the physical display process, the subject having cutaneous nerves that fire spontaneously and have spiking patterns, the source of video stream comprising:
means for defining an image on the monitor, the image having an intensity; and
means for subliminally pulsing the image intensity with a frequency in the range 0.1 Hz to 15 Hz;
whereby the emitted electromagnetic field is pulsed, the cutaneous nerves are exposed to the pulsed electromagnetic field, and the spiking patterns of the nerves acquire a frequency modulation.
11. The source of video stream of claim 10 wherein the source is a recording medium that has recorded data, and the means for subliminally pulsing the image intensity comprise an attribute of the recorded data.
12. The source of video stream of claim 10 wherein the source is a computer program, and the means for subliminally pulsing the image intensity comprise a pulse routine.
13. The source of video stream of claim 10 wherein the source is a recording of a physical scene, and the means for subliminally pulsing the image intensity comprise:
pulse generator for generating voltage pulses;
light source for illuminating the scene, the light source having a power level; and
modulation means, responsive to the voltage pulses, for pulsing the power level.
14. The source of video stream of claim 10, wherein the source is a DVD, the video stream comprises a luminance signal and a chrominance signal, and the means for subliminal pulsing of the image intensity comprise means for pulsing the luminance signal.
~
Patent Citations
Cited Patent Filing date Publication date Applicant Title
US3592965 * Aug 22, 1967 Jul 13, 1971 Diaz Zaid Apparatus for converting cathode ray portrayable information to spacial images
US4800893 * Jun 10, 1987 Jan 31, 1989 Ross Sidney A Kinesthetic physical movement feedback display for controlling the nervous system of a living organism
US5169380 Mar 5, 1991 Dec 8, 1992 Brennan Michael J W Treatment of sleep disorders and alleviating disruption of circadian rhythms
US5304112 * Oct 16, 1991 Apr 19, 1994 Theresia A. Mrklas Stress reduction system and method
US5400383 * Dec 9, 1991 Mar 21, 1995 General Electric Company Fluoroscopic imager with frame-filling apparatus
US5412419 * Feb 11, 1991 May 2, 1995 Susana Ziarati Magnetic resonance imaging compatible audio and video system
US5450859 * Jul 6, 1993 Sep 19, 1995 The Catholic University Of America Protection of living systems from adverse effects of electric, magnetic and electromagnetic fields
US5782874 Jan 24, 1997 Jul 21, 1998 Loos; Hendricus G. Method and apparatus for manipulating nervous systems
US5800481 Dec 28, 1995 Sep 1, 1998 Loos; Hendricus G. Thermal excitation of sensory resonances
US5899922 Nov 14, 1997 May 4, 1999 Loos; Hendricus G. Manipulation of nervous systems by electric fields
US5935054 Jun 7, 1995 Aug 10, 1999 Loos; Hendricus G. Magnetic excitation of sensory resonances
US6017302 Oct 31, 1997 Jan 25, 2000 Loos; Hendricus G. Subliminal acoustic manipulation of nervous systems
US6081744 Jul 17, 1998 Jun 27, 2000 Loos; Hendricus G. Electric fringe field generator for manipulating nervous systems
US6091994 Aug 31, 1998 Jul 18, 2000 Loos; Hendricus G. Pulsative manipulation of nervous systems
US6167304 Jun 17, 1999 Dec 26, 2000 Loos; Hendricus G. Pulse variability in electric field manipulation of nervous systems
US6238333 Aug 10, 1999 May 29, 2001 Hendricus G. Loos Remote magnetic manipulation of nervous systems

War Is A Racket

~

mkultrawarisaracket1

~

War Is A Racket
By Major General Smedley Butler
Contents
Chapter 1: War Is A Racket
Chapter 2: Who Makes The Profits?
Chapter 3: Who Pays The Bills?
Chapter 4: How To Smash This Racket!
Chapter 5: To Hell With War!

Smedley Darlington Butler

Born: West Chester, Pa., July 30, 1881
Educated: Haverford School
Married: Ethel C. Peters, of Philadelphia, June 30, 1905
Awarded two congressional medals of honor:
1. capture of Vera Cruz, Mexico, 1914
2. capture of Ft. Riviere, Haiti, 1917
Distinguished service medal, 1919
Major General – United States Marine Corps
Retired Oct. 1, 1931
On leave of absence to act as Director of Dept. of Safety, Philadelphia, 1932
Lecturer — 1930’s
Republican Candidate for Senate, 1932
Died at Naval Hospital, Philadelphia, June 21, 1940
For more information about Major General Butler, contact the United States Marine Corps.
CHAPTER ONE

War Is A Racket

WAR is a racket. It always has been.

It is possibly the oldest, easily the most profitable, surely the most vicious. It is the only one international in scope. It is the only one in which the profits are reckoned in dollars and the losses in lives.

A racket is best described, I believe, as something that is not what it seems to the majority of the people. Only a small “inside” group knows what it is about. It is conducted for the benefit of the very few, at the expense of the very many. Out of war a few people make huge fortunes.

In the World War [I] a mere handful garnered the profits of the conflict. At least 21,000 new millionaires and billionaires were made in the United States during the World War. That many admitted their huge blood gains in their income tax returns. How many other war millionaires falsified their tax returns no one knows.

How many of these war millionaires shouldered a rifle? How many of them dug a trench?
How many of them knew what it meant to go hungry in a rat-infested dug-out? How many of them spent sleepless, frightened nights, ducking shells and shrapnel and machine gun
bullets? How many of them parried a bayonet thrust of an enemy? How many of them were wounded or killed in battle?

Out of war nations acquire additional territory, if they are victorious. They just take it. This
newly acquired territory promptly is exploited by the few — the selfsame few who wrung
dollars out of blood in the war. The general public shoulders the bill.

And what is this bill?

This bill renders a horrible accounting. Newly placed gravestones. Mangled bodies.
Shattered minds. Broken hearts and homes. Economic instability. Depression and all its
attendant miseries. Back-breaking taxation for generations and generations.

For a great many years, as a soldier, I had a suspicion that war was a racket; not until I
retired to civil life did I fully realize it. Now that I see the international war clouds gathering, as they are today, I must face it and speak out.

Again they are choosing sides. France and Russia met and agreed to stand side by side. Italy and Austria hurried to make a similar agreement. Poland and Germany cast sheep’s eyes at each other, forgetting for the nonce [one unique occasion], their dispute over the Polish Corridor.

The assassination of King Alexander of Jugoslavia [Yugoslavia] complicated matters.
Jugoslavia and Hungary, long bitter enemies, were almost at each other’s throats. Italy was
ready to jump in. But France was waiting. So was Czechoslovakia. All of them are looking
ahead to war. Not the people — not those who fight and pay and die — only those who foment wars and remain safely at home to profit.

There are 40,000,000 men under arms in the world today, and our statesmen and diplomats have the temerity to say that war is not in the making.

Hell’s bells! Are these 40,000,000 men being trained to be dancers?

Not in Italy, to be sure. Premier Mussolini knows what they are being trained for. He, at
least, is frank enough to speak out. Only the other day, Il Duce in “International
Conciliation,” the publication of the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace, said:

“And above all, Fascism, the more it considers and observes the future and the development of humanity quite apart from political considerations of the moment, believes neither in the possibility nor the utility of perpetual peace. . . .

War alone brings up to its highest tension all human energy and puts the stamp of nobility upon the people who have the courage to meet it.”

Undoubtedly Mussolini means exactly what he says. His well-trained army, his great fleet of planes, and even his navy are ready for war — anxious for it, apparently. His recent stand at the side of Hungary in the latter’s dispute with Jugoslavia showed that. And the hurried mobilization of his troops on the Austrian border after the assassination of Dollfuss showed it too.

There are others in Europe too whose sabre rattling presages war, sooner or later.

Herr Hitler, with his rearming Germany and his constant demands for more and more arms, is an equal if not greater menace to peace. France only recently increased the term of military service for its youth from a year to eighteen months.

Yes, all over, nations are camping in their arms. The mad dogs of Europe are on the loose. In the Orient the maneuvering is more adroit. Back in 1904, when Russia and Japan fought, we kicked out our old friends the Russians and backed Japan. Then our very generous
international bankers were financing Japan. Now the trend is to poison us against the
Japanese.

What does the “open door” policy to China mean to us? Our trade with China is about $90,000,000 a year.

Or the Philippine Islands? We have spent about $600,000,000 in the Philippines in thirty-five years and we (our bankers and industrialists and speculators) have private investments there of less than $200,000,000.

Then, to save that China trade of about $90,000,000, or to protect these private investments of less than $200,000,000 in the Philippines, we would be all stirred up to hate Japan and go to war — a war that might well cost us tens of billions of dollars, hundreds of thousands of lives of Americans, and many more hundreds of thousands of physically maimed and mentally unbalanced men.

Of course, for this loss, there would be a compensating profit — fortunes would be made.
Millions and billions of dollars would be piled up. By a few. Munitions makers. Bankers.
Ship builders. Manufacturers. Meat packers. Speculators. They would fare well.

Yes, they are getting ready for another war. Why shouldn’t they? It pays high dividends.

But what does it profit the men who are killed? What does it profit their mothers and sisters, their wives and their sweethearts? What does it profit their children? What does it profit anyone except the very few to whom war means huge profits?

Yes, and what does it profit the nation?

Take our own case. Until 1898 we didn’t own a bit of territory outside the mainland of North America. At that time our national debt was a little more than $1,000,000,000. Then we became “internationally minded.” We forgot, or shunted aside, the advice of the Father of our country. We forgot George Washington’s warning about “entangling alliances.” We went to war.

We acquired outside territory. At the end of the World War period, as a direct result
of our fiddling in international affairs, our national debt had jumped to over $25,000,000,000. Our total favorable trade balance during the twenty-five-year period was about $24,000,000,000. Therefore, on a purely bookkeeping basis, we ran a little behind year for year, and that foreign trade might well have been ours without the wars.

It would have been far cheaper (not to say safer) for the average American who pays the bills to stay out of foreign entanglements. For a very few this racket, like bootlegging and other underworld rackets, brings fancy profits, but the cost of operations is always transferred to the people — who do not profit.

CHAPTER TWO

Who Makes The Profits?

The World War, rather our brief participation in it, has cost the United States some
$52,000,000,000. Figure it out. That means $400 to every American man, woman, and child. And we haven’t paid the debt yet. We are paying it, our children will pay it, and our
children’s children probably still will be paying the cost of that war.

The normal profits of a business concern in the United States are six, eight, ten, and
sometimes twelve percent. But war-time profits — ah! that is another matter — twenty, sixty, one hundred, three hundred, and even eighteen hundred per cent — the sky is the limit. All that traffic will bear. Uncle Sam has the money. Let’s get it.

Of course, it isn’t put that crudely in war time. It is dressed into speeches about patriotism, love of country, and “we must all put our shoulders to the wheel,” but the profits jump and leap and skyrocket — and are safely pocketed. Let’s just take a few examples:

Take our friends the du Ponts, the powder people — didn’t one of them testify before a
Senate committee recently that their powder won the war? Or saved the world for
democracy? Or something? How did they do in the war? They were a patriotic corporation.

Well, the average earnings of the du Ponts for the period 1910 to 1914 were $6,000,000 a
year. It wasn’t much, but the du Ponts managed to get along on it. Now let’s look at their
average yearly profit during the war years, 1914 to 1918. Fifty-eight million dollars a year
profit we find! Nearly ten times that of normal times, and the profits of normal times were
pretty good. An increase in profits of more than 950 per cent.

Take one of our little steel companies that patriotically shunted aside the making of rails and girders and bridges to manufacture war materials. Well, their 1910-1914 yearly earnings averaged $6,000,000. Then came the war. And, like loyal citizens, Bethlehem Steel promptly turned to munitions making. Did their profits jump — or did they let Uncle Sam in for a bargain? Well, their 1914-1918 average was $49,000,000 a year!

Or, let’s take United States Steel. The normal earnings during the five-year period prior to
the war were $105,000,000 a year. Not bad. Then along came the war and up went the
profits. The average yearly profit for the period 1914-1918 was $240,000,000. Not bad.

There you have some of the steel and powder earnings. Let’s look at something else. A little copper, perhaps. That always does well in war times.

Anaconda, for instance. Average yearly earnings during the pre-war years 1910-1914 of
$10,000,000. During the war years 1914-1918 profits leaped to $34,000,000 per year.

Or Utah Copper. Average of $5,000,000 per year during the 1910-1914 period. Jumped to an
average of $21,000,000 yearly profits for the war period.

Let’s group these five, with three smaller companies. The total yearly average profits of the pre-war period 1910-1914 were $137,480,000. Then along came the war. The average yearly profits for this group skyrocketed to $408,300,000. A little increase in profits of approximately 200 per cent.

Does war pay? It paid them. But they aren’t the only ones. There are still others. Let’s take
leather.

For the three-year period before the war the total profits of Central Leather Company were
$3,500,000. That was approximately $1,167,000 a year. Well, in 1916 Central Leather
returned a profit of $15,000,000, a small increase of 1,100 per cent. That’s all. The General
Chemical Company averaged a profit for the three years before the war of a little over
$800,000 a year. Came the war, and the profits jumped to $12,000,000. a leap of 1,400 per
cent.

International Nickel Company — and you can’t have a war without nickel — showed an
increase in profits from a mere average of $4,000,000 a year to $73,000,000 yearly. Not bad? An increase of more than 1,700 per cent.

American Sugar Refining Company averaged $2,000,000 a year for the three years before
the war. In 1916 a profit of $6,000,000 was recorded.

Listen to Senate Document No. 259. The Sixty-Fifth Congress, reporting on corporate
earnings and government revenues. Considering the profits of 122 meat packers, 153 cotton manufacturers, 299 garment makers, 49 steel plants, and 340 coal producers during the war.

Profits under 25 per cent were exceptional. For instance the coal companies made between
100 per cent and 7,856 per cent on their capital stock during the war. The Chicago packers
doubled and tripled their earnings.

And let us not forget the bankers who financed the great war. If anyone had the cream of the profits it was the bankers. Being partnerships rather than incorporated organizations, they do not have to report to stockholders. And their profits were as secret as they were immense. How the bankers made their millions and their billions I do not know, because those little secrets never become public — even before a Senate investigatory body.

But here’s how some of the other patriotic industrialists and speculators chiseled their way into war profits.

Take the shoe people. They like war. It brings business with abnormal profits. They made
huge profits on sales abroad to our allies. Perhaps, like the munitions manufacturers and
armament makers, they also sold to the enemy. For a dollar is a dollar whether it comes from Germany or from France. But they did well by Uncle Sam too. For instance, they sold Uncle Sam 35,000,000 pairs of hobnailed service shoes. There were 4,000,000 soldiers. Eight pairs, and more, to a soldier. My regiment during the war had only one pair to a soldier. Some of these shoes probably are still in existence. They were good shoes. But when the war was over Uncle Sam has a matter of 25,000,000 pairs left over. Bought — and paid for. Profits recorded and pocketed.

There was still lots of leather left. So the leather people sold your Uncle Sam hundreds of
thousands of McClellan saddles for the cavalry. But there wasn’t any American cavalry
overseas! Somebody had to get rid of this leather, however. Somebody had to make a profit
in it — so we had a lot of McClellan saddles. And we probably have those yet.

Also somebody had a lot of mosquito netting. They sold your Uncle Sam 20,000,000
mosquito nets for the use of the soldiers overseas. I suppose the boys were expected to put it over them as they tried to sleep in muddy trenches — one hand scratching cooties on their backs and the other making passes at scurrying rats. Well, not one of these mosquito nets ever got to France!

Anyhow, these thoughtful manufacturers wanted to make sure that no soldier would be
without his mosquito net, so 40,000,000 additional yards of mosquito netting were sold to
Uncle Sam.

There were pretty good profits in mosquito netting in those days, even if there were no
mosquitoes in France. I suppose, if the war had lasted just a little longer, the enterprising
mosquito netting manufacturers would have sold your Uncle Sam a couple of consignments of mosquitoes to plant in France so that more mosquito netting would be in order.

Airplane and engine manufacturers felt they, too, should get their just profits out of this war. Why not? Everybody else was getting theirs. So $1,000,000,000 — count them if you live long enough — was spent by Uncle Sam in building airplane engines that never left the ground! Not one plane, or motor, out of the billion dollars worth ordered, ever got into a battle in France. Just the same the manufacturers made their little profit of 30, 100, or
perhaps 300 per cent.

Undershirts for soldiers cost 14¢ [cents] to make and uncle Sam paid 30¢ to 40¢ each for
them — a nice little profit for the undershirt manufacturer. And the stocking manufacturer and the uniform manufacturers and the cap manufacturers and the steel helmet manufacturers — all got theirs.

Why, when the war was over some 4,000,000 sets of equipment — knapsacks and the things that go to fill them — crammed warehouses on this side. Now they are being scrapped because the regulations have changed the contents. But the manufacturers collected their wartime profits on them — and they will do it all over again the next time.

There were lots of brilliant ideas for profit making during the war.

One very versatile patriot sold Uncle Sam twelve dozen 48-inch wrenches. Oh, they were
very nice wrenches. The only trouble was that there was only one nut ever made that was
large enough for these wrenches. That is the one that holds the turbines at Niagara Falls.
Well, after Uncle Sam had bought them and the manufacturer had pocketed the profit, the
wrenches were put on freight cars and shunted all around the United States in an effort to
find a use for them. When the Armistice was signed it was indeed a sad blow to the wrench
manufacturer. He was just about to make some nuts to fit the wrenches. Then he planned to sell these, too, to your Uncle Sam.

Still another had the brilliant idea that colonels shouldn’t ride in automobiles, nor should
they even ride on horseback. One has probably seen a picture of Andy Jackson riding in a
buckboard. Well, some 6,000 buckboards were sold to Uncle Sam for the use of colonels!
Not one of them was used. But the buckboard manufacturer got his war profit.

The shipbuilders felt they should come in on some of it, too. They built a lot of ships that
made a lot of profit. More than $3,000,000,000 worth. Some of the ships were all right. But $635,000,000 worth of them were made of wood and wouldn’t float! The seams opened up — and they sank. We paid for them, though. And somebody pocketed the profits.

It has been estimated by statisticians and economists and researchers that the war cost your Uncle Sam $52,000,000,000. Of this sum, $39,000,000,000 was expended in the actual war itself. This expenditure yielded $16,000,000,000 in profits. That is how the 21,000 billionaires and millionaires got that way. This $16,000,000,000 profits is not to be sneezed at. It is quite a tidy sum. And it went to a very few.

The Senate (Nye) committee probe of the munitions industry and its wartime profits, despite its sensational disclosures, hardly has scratched the surface.

Even so, it has had some effect. The State Department has been studying “for some time”
methods of keeping out of war. The War Department suddenly decides it has a wonderful
plan to spring. The Administration names a committee — with the War and Navy
Departments ably represented under the chairmanship of a Wall Street speculator — to limit profits in war time. To what extent isn’t suggested. Hmmm. Possibly the profits of 300 and 600 and 1,600 per cent of those who turned blood into gold in the World War would be limited to some smaller figure.

Apparently, however, the plan does not call for any limitation of losses — that is, the losses of those who fight the war. As far as I have been able to ascertain there is nothing in the scheme to limit a soldier to the loss of but one eye, or one arm, or to limit his wounds to one or two or three. Or to limit the loss of life.

There is nothing in this scheme, apparently, that says not more than 12 per cent of a regiment shall be wounded in battle, or that not more than 7 per cent in a division shall be killed.

Of course, the committee cannot be bothered with such trifling matters.

CHAPTER THREE

Who Pays The Bills?

Who provides the profits — these nice little profits of 20, 100, 300, 1,500 and 1,800 per cent? We all pay them — in taxation. We paid the bankers their profits when we bought Liberty Bonds at $100.00 and sold them back at $84 or $86 to the bankers. These bankers collected  $100 plus. It was a simple manipulation. The bankers control the security marts. It was easy for them to depress the price of these bonds. Then all of us — the people — got frightened and sold the bonds at $84 or $86. The bankers bought them. Then these same bankers stimulated a boom and government bonds went to par — and above. Then the bankers collected their profits.

But the soldier pays the biggest part of the bill.

If you don’t believe this, visit the American cemeteries on the battlefields abroad. Or visit
any of the veteran’s hospitals in the United States. On a tour of the country, in the midst of which I am at the time of this writing, I have visited eighteen government hospitals for
veterans. In them are a total of about 50,000 destroyed men — men who were the pick of the nation eighteen years ago. The very able chief surgeon at the government hospital; at
Milwaukee, where there are 3,800 of the living dead, told me that mortality among veterans is three times as great as among those who stayed at home.

Boys with a normal viewpoint were taken out of the fields and offices and factories and
classrooms and put into the ranks. There they were remolded; they were made over; they
were made to “about face”; to regard murder as the order of the day. They were put shoulder to shoulder and, through mass psychology, they were entirely changed. We used them for a couple of years and trained them to think nothing at all of killing or of being killed.

Then, suddenly, we discharged them and told them to make another “about face” ! This time they had to do their own readjustment, sans [without] mass psychology, sans officers’ aid and advice and sans nation-wide propaganda. We didn’t need them any more. So we scattered them about without any “three-minute” or “Liberty Loan” speeches or parades.

Many, too many, of these fine young boys are eventually destroyed, mentally, because they
could not make that final “about face” alone.

In the government hospital in Marion, Indiana, 1,800 of these boys are in pens! Five hundred of them in a barracks with steel bars and wires all around outside the buildings and on the porches. These already have been mentally destroyed. These boys don’t even look like human beings. Oh, the looks on their faces! Physically, they are in good shape; mentally, they are gone.

There are thousands and thousands of these cases, and more and more are coming in all the time. The tremendous excitement of the war, the sudden cutting off of that excitement — the young boys couldn’t stand it.

That’s a part of the bill.

So much for the dead — they have paid their part of the war profits.

So much for the mentally and physically wounded — they are paying now their share of the war profits.

But the others paid, too — they paid with heartbreaks when they tore themselves
away from their firesides and their families to don the uniform of Uncle Sam — on which a
profit had been made.

They paid another part in the training camps where they were regimented and drilled while others took their jobs and their places in the lives of their communities. The paid for it in the trenches where they shot and were shot; where they were hungry for days at a time; where they slept in the mud and the cold and in the rain — with the moans and shrieks of the dying for a horrible lullaby.

But don’t forget — the soldier paid part of the dollars and cents bill too.

Up to and including the Spanish-American War, we had a prize system, and soldiers and
sailors fought for money. During the Civil War they were paid bonuses, in many instances,
before they went into service. The government, or states, paid as high as $1,200 for an
enlistment. In the Spanish-American War they gave prize money. When we captured any
vessels, the soldiers all got their share — at least, they were supposed to. Then it was found that we could reduce the cost of wars by taking all the prize money and keeping it, but conscripting [drafting] the soldier anyway. Then soldiers couldn’t bargain for their labor, Everyone else could bargain, but the soldier couldn’t.

Napoleon once said, “All men are enamored of decorations . . . they positively hunger for them.”

So by developing the Napoleonic system — the medal business — the government learned it could get soldiers for less money, because the boys liked to be decorated. Until the Civil War there were no medals. Then the Congressional Medal of Honor was handed out. It made enlistments easier. After the Civil War no new medals were issued until the
Spanish-American War.

In the World War, we used propaganda to make the boys accept conscription. They were
made to feel ashamed if they didn’t join the army.

So vicious was this war propaganda that even God was brought into it. With few exceptions
our clergymen joined in the clamor to kill, kill, kill. To kill the Germans. God is on our side
. . it is His will that the Germans be killed.

And in Germany, the good pastors called upon the Germans to kill the allies . . . to please the same God. That was a part of the general propaganda, built up to make people war conscious and murder conscious.

Beautiful ideals were painted for our boys who were sent out to die. This was the “war to end all wars.” This was the “war to make the world safe for democracy.” No one mentioned to them, as they marched away, that their going and their dying would mean huge war profits.

No one told these American soldiers that they might be shot down by bullets made by their
own brothers here. No one told them that the ships on which they were going to cross might be torpedoed by submarines built with United States patents. They were just told it was to be a “glorious adventure.”

Thus, having stuffed patriotism down their throats, it was decided to make them help pay for the war, too. So, we gave them the large salary of $30 a month. All they had to do for this munificent sum was to leave their dear ones behind, give up their jobs, lie in swampy trenches, eat canned willy (when they could get it) and kill and kill and kill . . . and be killed.

But wait!

Half of that wage (just a little more than a riveter in a shipyard or a laborer in a munitions
factory safe at home made in a day) was promptly taken from him to support his dependents, so that they would not become a charge upon his community. Then we made him pay what amounted to accident insurance — something the employer pays for in an enlightened state — and that cost him $6 a month. He had less than $9 a month left.

Then, the most crowning insolence of all — he was virtually blackjacked into paying for his own ammunition, clothing, and food by being made to buy Liberty Bonds. Most soldiers got no money at all on pay days.

We made them buy Liberty Bonds at $100 and then we bought them back — when they came back from the war and couldn’t find work — at $84 and $86. And the soldiers bought about $2,000,000,000 worth of these bonds!

Yes, the soldier pays the greater part of the bill. His family pays too. They pay it in the same heart-break that he does. As he suffers, they suffer. At nights, as he lay in the trenches and watched shrapnel burst about him, they lay home in their beds and tossed sleeplessly — his father, his mother, his wife, his sisters, his brothers, his sons, and his daughters.

When he returned home minus an eye, or minus a leg or with his mind broken, they suffered too — as much as and even sometimes more than he. Yes, and they, too, contributed their dollars to the profits of the munitions makers and bankers and shipbuilders and the manufacturers and the speculators made. They, too, bought Liberty Bonds and contributed to the profit of the bankers after the Armistice in the hocus-pocus of manipulated Liberty Bond prices.

And even now the families of the wounded men and of the mentally broken and those who
never were able to readjust themselves are still suffering and still paying.

CHAPTER FOUR

How To Smash This Racket!

WELL, it’s a racket, all right.

A few profit — and the many pay. But there is a way to stop it. You can’t end it by
disarmament conferences. You can’t eliminate it by peace parleys at Geneva.

Well-meaning but impractical groups can’t wipe it out by resolutions. It can be smashed effectively only by taking the profit out of war.

The only way to smash this racket is to conscript capital and industry and labor before the
nations manhood can be conscripted. One month before the Government can conscript the young men of the nation — it must conscript capital and industry and labor. Let the officers and the directors and the high-powered executives of our armament factories and our munitions makers and our shipbuilders and our airplane builders and the manufacturers of all the other things that provide profit in war time as well as the bankers and the speculators, be conscripted — to get $30 a month, the same wage as the lads in the trenches get.

Let the workers in these plants get the same wages — all the workers, all presidents, all
executives, all directors, all managers, all bankers — yes, and all generals and all admirals
and all officers and all politicians and all government office holders — everyone in the nation be restricted to a total monthly income not to exceed that paid to the soldier in the trenches!

Let all these kings and tycoons and masters of business and all those workers in industry and all our senators and governors and majors pay half of their monthly $30 wage to their
families and pay war risk insurance and buy Liberty Bonds.

Why shouldn’t they?

They aren’t running any risk of being killed or of having their bodies mangled or their minds shattered. They aren’t sleeping in muddy trenches. They aren’t hungry. The soldiers are!

Give capital and industry and labor thirty days to think it over and you will find, by that time, there will be no war. That will smash the war racket — that and nothing else.

Maybe I am a little too optimistic. Capital still has some say. So capital won’t permit the
taking of the profit out of war until the people — those who do the suffering and still pay the price — make up their minds that those they elect to office shall do their bidding, and not that of the profiteers.

Another step necessary in this fight to smash the war racket is the limited plebiscite to
determine whether a war should be declared. A plebiscite not of all the voters but merely of those who would be called upon to do the fighting and dying. There wouldn’t be very much sense in having a 76-year-old president of a munitions factory or the flat-footed head of an international banking firm or the cross-eyed manager of a uniform manufacturing plant — all of whom see visions of tremendous profits in the event of war — voting on whether the nation should go to war or not. They never would be called upon to shoulder arms — to sleep in a trench and to be shot. Only those who would be called upon to risk their lives for their country should have the privilege of voting to determine whether the nation should go to war.

There is ample precedent for restricting the voting to those affected. Many of our states have restrictions on those permitted to vote. In most, it is necessary to be able to read and write before you may vote. In some, you must own property. It would be a simple matter each year for the men coming of military age to register in their communities as they did in the draft during the World War and be examined physically. Those who could pass and who would therefore be called upon to bear arms in the event of war would be eligible to vote in a limited plebiscite. They should be the ones to have the power to decide — and not a Congress few of whose members are within the age limit and fewer still of whom are in physical condition to bear arms. Only those who must suffer should have the right to vote.

A third step in this business of smashing the war racket is to make certain that our military forces are truly forces for defense only.

At each session of Congress the question of further naval appropriations comes up. The
swivel-chair admirals of Washington (and there are always a lot of them) are very adroit
lobbyists. And they are smart. They don’t shout that “We need a lot of battleships to war on this nation or that nation.” Oh no. First of all, they let it be known that America is menaced by a great naval power. Almost any day, these admirals will tell you, the great fleet of this supposed enemy will strike suddenly and annihilate 125,000,000 people. Just like that. Then they begin to cry for a larger navy. For what? To fight the enemy? Oh my, no. Oh, no. For defense purposes only.

Then, incidentally, they announce maneuvers in the Pacific. For defense. Uh, huh.

The Pacific is a great big ocean. We have a tremendous coastline on the Pacific. Will the
maneuvers be off the coast, two or three hundred miles? Oh, no. The maneuvers will be two thousand, yes, perhaps even thirty-five hundred miles, off the coast.

The Japanese, a proud people, of course will be pleased beyond expression to see the United States fleet so close to Nippon’s shores. Even as pleased as would be the residents of California were they to dimly discern through the morning mist, the Japanese fleet playing at war games off Los Angeles.

The ships of our navy, it can be seen, should be specifically limited, by law, to within 200
miles of our coastline. Had that been the law in 1898 the Maine would never have gone to
Havana Harbor. She never would have been blown up. There would have been no war with
Spain with its attendant loss of life. Two hundred miles is ample, in the opinion of experts,
for defense purposes. Our nation cannot start an offensive war if its ships can’t go further
than 200 miles from the coastline. Planes might be permitted to go as far as 500 miles from the coast for purposes of reconnaissance. And the army should never leave the territorial limits of our nation.

To summarize: Three steps must be taken to smash the war racket.

1. We must take the profit out of war.

2. We must permit the youth of the land who would bear arms to decide whether or not
there should be war.

3. We must limit our military forces to home defense purposes.

CHAPTER FIVE

To Hell With War!

I am not a fool as to believe that war is a thing of the past. I know the people do not want
war, but there is no use in saying we cannot be pushed into another war.

Looking back, Woodrow Wilson was re-elected president in 1916 on a platform that he had
“kept us out of war” and on the implied promise that he would “keep us out of war.” Yet,
five months later he asked Congress to declare war on Germany.

In that five-month interval the people had not been asked whether they had changed their minds. The 4,000,000 young men who put on uniforms and marched or sailed away were not asked whether they wanted to go forth to suffer and die.

Then what caused our government to change its mind so suddenly?

Money.

An allied commission, it may be recalled, came over shortly before the war declaration and
called on the President. The President summoned a group of advisers. The head of the
commission spoke. Stripped of its diplomatic language, this is what he told the President and his group:

“There is no use kidding ourselves any longer. The cause of the allies is lost. We now owe you (American bankers, American munitions makers, American manufacturers, American
speculators, American exporters) five or six billion dollars.

If we lose (and without the help of the United States we must lose) we, England, France and Italy, cannot pay back this money . . . and Germany won’t.

So . . . ”

Had secrecy been outlawed as far as war negotiations were concerned, and had the press
been invited to be present at that conference, or had radio been available to broadcast the
proceedings, America never would have entered the World War. But this conference, like all war discussions, was shrouded in utmost secrecy. When our boys were sent off to war they were told it was a “war to make the world safe for democracy” and a “war to end all wars.”

Well, eighteen years after, the world has less of democracy than it had then. Besides, what
business is it of ours whether Russia or Germany or England or France or Italy or Austria
live under democracies or monarchies? Whether they are Fascists or Communists? Our
problem is to preserve our own democracy.

And very little, if anything, has been accomplished to assure us that the World War was
really the war to end all wars.

Yes, we have had disarmament conferences and limitations of arms conferences. They don’t mean a thing. One has just failed; the results of another have been nullified. We send our professional soldiers and our sailors and our politicians and our diplomats to these conferences. And what happens?

The professional soldiers and sailors don’t want to disarm. No admiral wants to be without a ship. No general wants to be without a command. Both mean men without jobs. They are not for disarmament. They cannot be for limitations of arms. And at all these conferences,
lurking in the background but all-powerful, just the same, are the sinister agents of those who profit by war. They see to it that these conferences do not disarm or seriously limit
armaments.

The chief aim of any power at any of these conferences has not been to achieve disarmament to prevent war but rather to get more armament for itself and less for any potential foe.

There is only one way to disarm with any semblance of practicability. That is for all nations
to get together and scrap every ship, every gun, every rifle, every tank, every war plane.
Even this, if it were possible, would not be enough.

The next war, according to experts, will be fought not with battleships, not by artillery, not
with rifles and not with machine guns. It will be fought with deadly chemicals and gases.

Secretly each nation is studying and perfecting newer and ghastlier means of annihilating its foes wholesale. Yes, ships will continue to be built, for the shipbuilders must make their profits. And guns still will be manufactured and powder and rifles will be made, for the munitions makers must make their huge profits. And the soldiers, of course, must wear uniforms, for the manufacturer must make their war profits too.

But victory or defeat will be determined by the skill and ingenuity of our scientists.

If we put them to work making poison gas and more and more fiendish mechanical and
explosive instruments of destruction, they will have no time for the constructive job of
building greater prosperity for all peoples. By putting them to this useful job, we can all
make more money out of peace than we can out of war — even the munitions makers.

So…I say,

TO HELL WITH WAR!

Click on the following link for a Safe Pdf Download

https://www.sendspace.com/file/byg6b5

~

~

Smedley Darlington Butler[1] (July 30, 1881 – June 21, 1940) was a United States Marine Corps major general, the highest rank authorized at that time, and at the time of his death the most decorated Marine in U.S. history. During his 34-year career as a Marine, he participated in military actions in the Philippines, China, in Central America and the Caribbean during the Banana Wars, and France in World War I. Butler is well known for having later become an outspoken critic of U.S. wars and their consequences, as well as exposing the Business Plot, an alleged plan to overthrow the U.S. government.

By the end of his career, Butler had received 16 medals, five for heroism. He is one of 19 men to receive the Medal of Honor twice, one of three to be awarded both the Marine Corps Brevet Medal and the Medal of Honor, and the only Marine to be awarded the Brevet Medal and two Medals of Honor, all for separate actions.

In 1933, he became involved in a controversy known as the Business Plot, when he told a congressional committee that a group of wealthy industrialists were planning a military coup to overthrow Franklin D. Roosevelt, with Butler selected to lead a march of veterans to become dictator, similar to other Fascist regimes at that time. The individuals involved all denied the existence of a plot and the media ridiculed the allegations. A final report by a special House of Representatives Committee confirmed some of Butler’s testimony.

In 1935, Butler wrote a book entitled War Is a Racket, where he described and criticized the workings of the United States in its foreign actions and wars, such as those he was a part of, including the American corporations and other imperialist motivations behind them. After retiring from service, he became a popular activist, speaking at meetings organized by veterans, pacifists, and church groups in the 1930s.

Click HERE FOR REST OF BIOGRAPHY OF MAJOR GENERAL SMEDLEY BUTLER