SHADOW OF THE SWASTIKA:



The Real Reason the Government Won't Debate

Medical Cannabis and Industrial Hemp Relegalization:



----------------------------------------------------------------

Documented Evidence of a Secret Business and Political

Alliance Between the U.S. "Establishment" and the Nazis,

Before, During and After World War II, up to the Present.

----------------------------------------------------------------



By R. William Davis

Director, The Elkhorn Project





-------

PREFACE

-------



     Before the Gatewood Galbraith for Governor Campaign in 1991, few

Kentuckians knew that the plant that the federal government had

demonized for over 50 years as "Marijuana - Assassin of Youth," was,

in fact, Cannabis Hemp, the most traded commodity in the world until

the mid-1800s, and our state's number one crop, industry, and most

important source of revenue, for over 150 years.



     Today, thanks to the efforts of pioneer hemp researchers and

public advocates such as Galbraith, Jack Fraizer, Jack Herer, Chris

Conrad, Ed Rosenthal, Don Wirtshafter and others, the federal

government's unjustifiable suppression of our state's right to develop

our most valuable and versatile natural resource, is facing increasing

opposition from an informed public.  Hemp is now recognized as the

number one agriculturally renewable raw material in the world, and

perhaps the only crop / industry which can guarantee us industrial and

economic independence from the trans-national corporations.



     "Shadow of the Swastika" is a follow-up to my earlier work,

"Cannabis Hemp: the Invisible Prohibition Revealed," which I wrote and

published in support of the Galbraith Campaign.  Since publication of

that booklet, there has been growing public acceptance of the evidence

that Marijuana Prohibition was created in 1937, not to protect society

from the "evils of the drug Marijuana," as the Federal government

claimed, but as an act of deliberate economic and industrial sabotage

against the re-emerging Industrial Hemp Industry.



     Previous investigations by hemp researchers have been limited to

the suppression of free-market competition from the hemp industry, and

focused on the activities of three prominent members of America's

corporate, industrial and banking establishment during the mid- to

late-1930s:



     WILLIAM RANDOLPH HEARST, the newspaper and magazine tycoon. The

expected rebirth of cannabis hemp as a less expensive source of pulp

for paper meant his millions of acres of prime timberland, and

investment in wood pulp papermaking equipment, would soon be worth

much less. In the 1920s, about the same time as the equipment was

developed to economically mass-produce raw hemp into pulp and fiber

for paper, he began the "Reefer Madness" hoax in his newspaper and

magazine publications.



     ANDREW MELLON, founder of the Gulf Oil Corporation. He knew that

cannabis hemp was an alternative industrial raw material for the

production of thousands of products, including fuel and plastics,

which, if allowed to compete in the free-market, would threaten the

future profits of the oil companies. As Secretary of the Treasury he

created the Federal Bureau of Narcotics, and appointed his own future

nephew-in-law, Harry Anslinger, as director. Anslinger would later use

the sensational, and totally fabricated, articles published by Hearst,

to push the Marijuana Tax Act of 1937 through Congress, which

successfully destroyed the rebirth of the cannabis hemp industry.



     A prominent member of one Congressional subcommittee who voted in

favor of this bill was Joseph Guffey of Pennsylvania, an oil tycoon

and former business partner of Andrew Mellon in the Spindletop oil

fields in Texas.



       THE DU PONT CHEMICAL CORPORATION, which owned the patents on

synthetic petrochemicals and industrial processes that promised

billions of dollars in future profits from the sale of wood pulp paper,

lead additives for gasoline, synthetic fibers and plastics, if hemp

could be suppressed. At the time, du Pont family influence in both

government and the private sector was unmatched, according to

historians and journalists.



     This publication, however, reveals documented historical evidence

that the suppression of the hemp industry was only one key part of a

much larger conspiracy in the 1930s, not only by the three corporate

interests named above, but by many others, as well.



     Congressional records, FBI reports and investigations by the

Justice Department, during the 1930s and 1940s, have already

documented evidence of this wider plot.  A list of the corporations

named include Du Pont, Standard Oil, and General Motors, all of which

were proven to be conspiring with Nazi industrial cartels to eliminate

competition world-wide and divide among themselves the Earth's

industrial resources and commercial markets, for profitable

exploitation.



     This conspiracy succeeded.  It is now obvious that this lack of

serious competition in the industrial raw materials market caused our

present - and totally contrived - addiction to petrochemicals.  Its

success is directly responsible for the most troubling problems we now

face in the 1990s; serious damage to our environment, concentration of

economic and political power into fewer and fewer hands, and the

weakening of the rights of individuals and states to determine their

own futures.



     It is more and more evident that, given the historical record,

the structure of the New World Order is being built upon the

Foundation of Marijuana Prohibition, and only the relegalization of

free-market hemp competition can save us.



R. William Davis

July 4, 1996

Louisville, Kentucky



------------

INTRODUCTION

------------



     To clearly understand the circumstances which existed during the

1930s and 1940s, and are the subject of this booklet, it would be

helpful to first put the hemp / petrochemical conflict into historical

perspective. The events which took place in the years leading up to

World War II were a continuation of a struggle between agricultural

and industrial interests that began before the American Revolution, a

struggle which has yet to be decided, even today.



AGRICULTURE VS. INDUSTRY



     The historical record, at least as it has been presented to us in

the public school system, is that the Civil War was fought to end

slavery.  This is not the whole story. The truth of the matter is that

it was also a clash between Northern industrialists and Southern

agriculturists, over control of the expansion into the newly opened

West.



     In 1845, Abraham Lincoln wrote, "I hold it a paramount duty of us

in the free states due to the union of the states, and perhaps to

liberty itself, to let the slavery of other states alone." (1)



     Concerning the Western territories, he said "The whole Nation is

interested that the best use shall be made of these territories.  We

want them for homes and free white people.  This they cannot be, to

any considerable extent, if slavery be planted within them." (2)



     Lincoln was caught in the middle between the Northern

industrialists and the Southern agriculturists, who both wanted to

dominate Western expansion because of the wealth it offered. The

industrialists knew that the agriculturists depended on slavery

because cotton, upon which Southern wealth was based, was very labor

intensive and required the inexpensive labor that slavery provided.

They knew that if the Western lands were declared "free states" then

the Southern agriculturists would be unable to compete, and would be

forced to leave Western expansion, and its potential profits, to the

Northern industrialists.



     Quoting "The Irony of Democracy," by Thomas R. Dye and T. Harmon

Zeigler, "The importance of the Civil War for America's elite

structure was the commanding position that the new industrial

capitalists  won  during  the  course of the struggle.  .  .  . The

economic transformation of the United States from an agricultural to

an industrial nation reached the crescendo of a revolution in the

second half of the nineteenth century.



     "Civil War profits compounded the capital of the industrialists

and placed them in a position to dominate the economic life of the

nation.  Moreover, when the Southern planters were removed from the

national scene, the government in Washington became the exclusive

domain of the new industrial leaders." (3)



     The Northern industrialists used this increased capital to build

the system of transcontinental railways, linking the Northeast with

both the South and West.  The labor for this undertaking was from the

Northeastern Establishment's own source of cheap labor - recently

freed slaves and poor immigrants from Europe and China - who suffered

under living conditions which were often little better than those

which existed under the Slave System just a few years before.



     It was during the years between the Civil War and the beginning

of the Twentieth Century that the Northern industrialists altered the

role of the American government. Originally established by the

Revolution to protect and preserve the lives, property and freedoms of

all Americans from repressive government, it was transformed into an

agency to protect the economic future of Northern industrialists.



     "[T]he industrial elites," according to Dye and Zeigler, "saw no

objection to legislation if it furthered their success in business.

Unrestricted competition might prove who was the fittest, but as an

added precaution to insure that the industrial capitalists themselves

emerged as the fittest, these new elites also insisted upon government

subsidies, patents, tariffs, loans, and massive giveaways of land and

other natural resources." (4)



     The struggle between Western farmers and the railroads owned by

the Northern industrialists is a good example.  To protect their

interests, citizens created "the Grange," an organization which helped

to enact state laws regulating the "ruthless aggression" of the

railroads.  In 1877, these laws were upheld by the Supreme Court in

the Munn v. Illinois decision.  But, a few years later, Justice

Stephen A. Field changed the role, and the very definition, of the

corporation.  He gave a new interpretation to the Fourteenth Amendment

that actually gave corporations legal status as citizens . . . as

artificial persons. (5)



     It was not long after this change in the interpretation of the

Fourteenth Amendment that John D. Rockefeller, the father of the

modern-day corporation, created the great Standard Oil Corporation

which, by the late 1880s, gained control over 90% of all the oil

refineries in America. (6)



     The roots of 20th Century American politics can best be

illustrated by the 1896 Presidential Election, won by Republican

William McKinley by a landslide.  The McKinley campaign was directed

by Marcus Alonzo Hanna of Standard Oil and raised a $16,000,000

campaign fund from wealthy fellow industrialists, (an amount that was

unmatched in Presidential campaigns until the 1960s).  The major theme

of the campaign, and one that would echo far into the future, was

"what's good for business is good for the country." (7)



     This emerging political and judicial misuse of power in America

was feared by Thomas Jefferson who, in 1787, wrote, "I think our

governments will remain virtuous for many centuries; as long as they

remain chiefly agricultural; and this will be as long as there shall

be vacant lands in any part of America.  When they get piled upon one

another in large cities as in Europe they will become corrupt as in

Europe." (8)



     It is important to remember that the American Revolution was a

clash between the agriculturists in the colonies, and the British

industrialists who controlled the government in England. Almost 100

years later the Civil War was fought as a continuation of the same

basic struggle, but with the victory going back to the industrialists.

This began the erosion of the American government "of the people, for

the people and by the people." The buying of the 1896 Presidential

Election, by Hanna of Standard Oil and the Northern industrial

interests, was the next important step on the long road to the

American government "of the corporation, for the corporation and by

the corporation."



     A few years later, World War I would forge an even closer

relationship between corporations and government in the United States,

as well as around the world.  Anthony Sampson, in his book "The Arms

Bazaar," notes that "the American companies, led by US Steel and du

Pont, were transformed by war orders.  US Steel, which had absorbed

Carnegie's old steel company, had made average annual profits in the

four pre-war years of $105 million, while in the four war years they

were $240 million; and du Pont's average profit went up from $6

million to $58 million. . . .



     "Certainly the arms companies had become much richer through the

war, and there were widespread suspicions that they were actually

trying to prolong it." (9)



     The bottom line is, of course, victory or profit, and in what

proportions?  To what lengths would this nation's top industrial

leaders go to secure their share of the profits before and during the

next "war to end all war?"



--------------------

NOTES:  INTRODUCTION

--------------------



1 - American Political Tradition, Hofstadter, p. 109.   (As

    reprinted in The Irony of Democracy, Thomas R. Dye and L.

    Harmon Zeigler, p. 72)



2 - American Political Tradition, p. 113.  (As reprinted in The

    Irony of Democracy, p. 72)



3 - Irony of Democracy, p. 73



4 - Ibid., p. 74



5 - Ibid., p. 75



6 - Ibid., p. 76



7 - Ibid., p. 82



8 - Ibid., p. 62



9 - The Arms Bazaar, Anthony Sampson, p. 65



-------------------------------

U.S. CORPORATIONS AND THE NAZIS

-------------------------------



     "A clique of U.S. industrialists is hell-bent to bring a fascist

state to supplant our democratic government and is working closely

with the fascist regime in Germany and Italy. I have had plenty of

opportunity in my post in Berlin to witness how close some of our

American ruling families are to the Nazi regime. . . .



     "Certain American industrialists had a great deal to do with

bringing fascist regimes into being in both Germany and Italy. They

extended aid to help Fascism occupy the seat of power, and they are

helping to keep it there."



         -- William E. Dodd, U.S. Ambassador to Germany, 1937. (1)



     A large volume of documentary evidence exists that reveals that

many of the richest, most powerful men in the United States, and the

giant corporations they controlled, were secretly allied with the

Nazis, both before and during World War II, even after war was

declared between Germany and America.  This alliance began with U.S.

corporate investment during the reconstruction of post-World War I

Germany in the 1920s and, years later, included financial, industrial

and military aid to the Nazis.



     On the pages which follow we will review which prominent

Americans and corporations were involved, what aid and comfort they

gave our nation's enemies - treasonable offenses during time of war,

and investigations into these matters which produced evidence of a

US/Nazi corporate conspiracy to bring a fascist state to America, and

eliminate competition in the industrial raw materials market in order

to force world-wide dependance on oil-based petrochemicals.



WILLIAM RANDOLPH HEARST



     Hearst, who was so concerned about the American public's health

and safety on the matter of marijuana use, apparently had no such

fears when it came to Hitler and the Nazis.  According to journalist

George Seldes:



     ". . . Hitler had the support of the most widely circulated

magazine in history, 'Readers Digest,' as well as nineteen big-city

newspapers and one of the three great American news agencies, the

$220-million Hearst press empire.



    ". . . William Randolph Hearst, Sr., . . . was the lord of all

the press lords in the United States.  The millions who read the

Hearst newspapers and magazines and saw Hearst newsreels in the

nation's moviehouses had their minds poisoned by Hitler propaganda.



     "It was . . . disclosed first to President Roosevelt [by

Ambassador Dodd] almost on the day it happened, in September 1934, and

it is detailed in the book 'Ambassador Dodd's Diary,' published in

1941, and again in libel-proof documents on file in the courts of the

state of New York.  William E. Dodd, professor of history [at the

University of Chicago], told me about the Hearst sell-out . . .



     "According to Ambassador Dodd, Hearst came to take the waters at

Bad Nauheim in September 1934, and Dodd somehow learned immediately

that Hitler had sent two of his most trusted Nazi propagandists,

Hanfstangel and Rosenberg, to ask Hearst how Nazism could present a

better image in the United States.  When Hearst went to Berlin later

in the month, he was taken to see Hitler."



     Seldes reports that a $400,000 a year deal was struck between

Hearst and Hitler, and signed by Doctor Joseph Goebbels, the Nazi

propaganda minister. "Hearst," continues Seldes, "completely changed

the editorial policy of his nineteen daily newspapers the same month

he got the money."



     In the court documents filed on behalf of Dan Gillmor, publisher

of a magazine named "Friday," in response to a lawsuit by Hearst,

under item 61, he states: "Promptly after this said visit with Adolf

Hitler and the making of said arrangements. . . said plaintiff,

William Randolph Hearst, instructed all Hearst press correspondents in

Germany, including those of INS [Hearst's International  News Service]

to report happenings in Germany only in a  friendly' manner. All of

such correspondents reporting happenings in Germany accurately and

without friendliness, sympathy and bias for the actions of the then

German government, were transferred elsewhere, discharged, or forced

to resign. . . ."



     In the late 1930s, Seldes recounts, when "several sedition

indictments [were brought by] the Department of Justice . . . against

a score or two of Americans, the defendants included an unusually

large minority of newspaper men and women, most of them Hearst

employees." (2)



ANDREW MELLON



     "Thurman Arnold, as assistant district attorney of the United

States, his assistant, Norman Littell, and several Congressional

investigations, have produced incontrovertible evidence that some of

our biggest monopolies entered into secret agreements with the Nazi

cartels and divided the world up among them," states Seldes in his

book, "Facts and Fascism," published in 1943.  "Most notorious of all

was Alcoa, the Mellon-Davis-Duke monopoly which is largely responsible

for the fact America did not have the aluminum with which to build

airplanes before and after Pearl Harbor, while Germany had an

unlimited supply." (3)



     Alcoa sabotage of American war production had already cost the

U.S. "10,000 fighters or 1,665 bombers," according to Congressman

Pierce of Oregon speaking in May 1941, because of "the effort to

protect Alcoa's monopolistic position. . ."



     "If America loses this war," said Secretary of the Interior

[Harold] Ickes, June 26, 1941, "it can thank the Aluminum Corporation

of America."



     "By its cartel agreement with I.G. Farben, controlled by Hitler,"

writes Seldes, "Alcoa sabotaged the aluminum program of the U.S. air

force.  The Truman Committee [on National Defense, chaired by then-

Senator Harry S. Truman in 1942] heard testimony that Alcoa's

representative, A.H. Bunker, $1-a-year head of the aluminum section of

O.P.M., prevented work on our $600,000,000 aluminum expansion

program." (4)



DU PONT AND GENERAL MOTORS



     General Motors is included here because, by 1929, the Du Pont

corporation had acquired controlling interest in, and had interlocking

directorships with, General Motors.



     Irenee du Pont, "the most imposing and powerful member of the

clan," according to biographer and historian Charles Higham, "was

obsessed with Hitler's principles.



     "He keenly followed the career of the future Fuhrer in the 1920s,

and on September 7, 1926, in a speech to the American Chemical Society,

he advocated a race of supermen, to be achieved by injecting special

drugs into them in boyhood to make their characters to order."

Higham's book on this subject, "Trading with the Enemy: An Expose of

the Nazi-American Money Plot 1933-1949," is highly recommended.



     Du Pont's anti-Semitism "matched that of Hitler" and, in 1933,

the Du Ponts "began financing native fascist groups in America . . ."

one of which Higham identifies as the American Liberty League: "a Nazi

organization whipping up hatred of blacks and Jews," and the "love of

Hitler.



     "Financed . . . to the tune of $500,000 the first year, the

Liberty League had a lavish thirty-one-room office in New York,

branches in twenty-six colleges, and fifteen subsidiary organizations

nationwide that distributed fifty million copies of its Nazi

pamphlets. . . .



     "The Du Ponts' fascistic behavior was seen in 1936, when Irenee

du Pont used General Motors money to finance the notorious Black

Legion.  This terrorist organization had as its purpose the prevention

of automobile workers from unionizing.  The members wore hoods and

black robes, with skulls and crossbones.  They fire-bombed union

meetings, murdered union organizers, often by beating them to death,

and dedicated their lives to destroying Jews and communists.  They

linked to the Ku Klux Klan. . . .  It was brought out that at least

fifty people, many of them blacks, had been butchered by the Legion."

(5)



     Du Pont support of Hitler extended into the very heart of the

Nazi war machine as well, according to Higham, and several other

researchers: "General Motors, under the control of the Du Pont family

of Delaware, played a part in collaboration" with the Nazis.



     "Between 1932 and 1939, bosses of General Motors poured $30

million into I.G. Farben  plants . . ."  Further, Higham informs us

that by "the mid-1930s, General Motors was committed to full-scale

production of trucks, armored cars, and tanks in Nazi Germany." (6)



     Researchers Morton Mintz and Jerry S. Cohen, in their book,

"Power Inc.," describe the Du Pont-GM-Nazi relationship in these

terms:



     ". . . In 1929, [Du Pont-controlled] GM acquired the largest

automobile company in Germany, Adam Opel, A.G.  This predestined the

subsidiary to become important to the Nazi war effort.  In a heavily

documented study presented to the Senate Subcommittee on Antitrust and

Monopoly in February 1974, Bradford C. Snell, an assistant

subcommittee counsel, wrote:



     "'GM's participation in Germany's preparation for war began in

1935.  That year its Opel subsidiary cooperated with the Reich in

locating a new heavy truck facility at Brandenburg, which military

officials advised would be less vulnerable to enemy air attacks.

During the succeeding years, GM supplied the Wehrmact with Opel

"Blitz" trucks from the Brandenburg complex.  For these and other

contributions to [the Nazis] wartime preparations, GM's chief

executive for overseas operations [James Mooney] was awarded the Order

of the German Eagle (first class) by Adolf Hitler.'"



     Du Pont-GM Nazi collaboration, according to Snell, included the

participation of Standard Oil of New Jersey [now Exxon] in one, very

important arrangement.  GM and Standard Oil of New Jersey formed a

joint subsidiary with the giant Nazi chemical cartel, I.G. Farben,

named Ethyl G.m.b.H. [now Ethyl, Inc.] which, according to Snell:

"provided the mechanized German armies with synthetic tetraethyl fuel

[leaded gas]. During 1936-39, at the urgent request of Nazi officials

who realized that Germany's scarce petroleum reserves would not

satisfy war demands, GM and Exxon joined with German chemical

interests in the erection of the lead-tetraethyl plants.  According to

captured German records, these facilities contributed substantially to

the German war effort: 'The fact that since the beginning of the war

we could produce lead-tetraethyl is entirely due to the circumstances

that, shortly before, the Americans [Du Pont, GM and Standard Oil] had

presented us with the production plants complete with experimental

knowledge.  Without lead-tetraethyl the present method of warfare

would be unthinkable.'" (7)



     At about the same time the Du Ponts were serving the Nazi cause

in Germany, they were involved in a Fascist plot to overthrow the

United States government.



     "Along with friends of the Morgan Bank and General Motors," in

early 1934, writes Higham, "certain Du Pont backers financed a coup

d'etat that would overthrow the President with the aid of a $3

million-funded army of terrorists . . ."  The object was to force

Roosevelt "to take orders from businessmen as part of a fascist

government or face the alternative of imprisonment and

execution . . . "



     Higham reports that "Du Pont men allegedly held an urgent series

of meetings with the Morgans," to choose who would lead this "bizarre

conspiracy."  "They finally settled on one of the most popular

soldiers in America, General Smedly Butler of Pennsylvania."  Butler

was approached by "fascist attorney" Gerald MacGuire (an official of

the American Legion), who attempted to recruit Butler into the role of

an American Hitler.



     "Butler was horrified," but played along with MacGuire until, a

short time later, he notified the White House of the plot.  Roosevelt

considered having "the leaders of the houses of Morgan and Du Pont"

arrested, but feared that "it would create an unthinkable national

crisis in the midst of a depression and perhaps another Wall Street

crash." Roosevelt decided the best way to defuse the plot was to

expose it, and leaked the story to the press.



     "The newspapers ran the story of the attempted coup on the front

page, but generally ridiculed it as absurd and preposterous."  But an

investigation by the Congressional Committee on Un-American Activities

- 74th Congress, first session, House of Representatives,

Investigation of Nazi and other propaganda - was begun later that same

year.



    "It was four years," continues Higham, "before the committee dared

to publish its report in a white paper that was marked for 'restricted

circulation.'  They were forced to admit that 'certain persons made an

attempt to establish a fascist organization in this country . . .

[The] committee was able to verify all the pertinent statements made

by General Butler.' This admission that the entire plan was deadly in

intent was not accompanied by the imprisonment of anybody.  Further

investigations disclosed that over a million people had been

guaranteed to join the scheme and that the arms and munitions

necessary would have been supplied by Remington, a Du Pont

subsidiary." (8)



     The names of important individuals and groups involved in the

conspiracy were suppressed by the committee, but later revealed by

Seldes, Philadelphia Record reporter Paul French, and Jules Archer,

author of the book, "The Plot to Seize the White House."  Included

were John W. Davis (attorney for the J.P. Morgan banking group),

Robert Sterling Clark (Wall Street broker and heir to the Singer

sewing machine fortune), William Doyle (American Legion official), and

the American Liberty League (backed by executives from J.P. Morgan and

Co., Rockefeller interests, E.F. Hutton, and Du Pont-controlled

General Motors). (9)



THE US/NAZI CARTEL AGREEMENT



     "On November 23, 1937," states Higham, "representatives of

General Motors held a secret meeting in Boston with Baron Manfred von

Killinger, who was . . . in charge of West Coast espionage [for the

Nazis], and Baron von Tipplekirsch, Nazi consul general and Gestapo

leader in Boston.  This group signed a joint agreement showing total

commitment to the Nazi cause for the indefinite future. . . ." (10)



     Seldes describes the plotters as "the great owners and rulers of

America who planned world domination through political and military

Fascism" including "several leading American industrialists, members

of the Congress of the United States, and representatives of large

business and political organizations . . ."



     He obtained the text of the agreement, and published it in his

newsletter, "In Fact," on July 13, 1942.  The plan "goes much further

than the mere cartel conspiracies of Big Business of both countries,"

writes Seldes, "because it has political clauses and points to a

bigger conspiracy of money and politicians such as helped betray

Norway and France and other lands to the Nazi machine.  The most

powerful fortress in America is the production monopolies, but its

betrayal would involve, as it did in France, the participation of some

of the most powerful figures of the political as well as the

industrial world." (11) 



[Back] or [On to Page Two]