Hitler's Favorite Banker Hjalmar Schacht: 11:30 meet [Old] Warsaw ( + Hotel) with T. and Hjalmar / Ilse - Get $ — November 7, 1963

[Leslie Sharp]

A researcher recently brought to my attention that Christopher Simpson's Splendid Blonde Beast details the machinations of certain US authorities, including OSS Chief "Wild" Bill Donovan, to ensure that Hitler’s (former) favorite banker Hjalmar Schacht was acquitted following indictment for war crimes. Despite Judge Robert Jackson’s objections, Schacht was released to resume his career. I urge all to read those sections if you have the book, bearing in mind that Robert Storey (director of RNB Dallas) and Leon Jaworski (attorney for Houston-based Schlumberger who maintained a Dallas presence in RNB Dallas) reported to Judge Jackson. Storey’s recently released diaries indicate he dined with Donovan on occasion during the Nuremberg ordeal. Storey later served as the exclusive Dallas liaison to Allen Dulles and the Warren Commission.

As we know, Bill Donovan, along with Allen Dulles and William Stephenson created the World Commerce Corporation, a vehicle that served Dulles and his corporate clients especially, but was also used by Otto Skorzeny to advance a visionary agenda shared by Hans-Ulrich Rudel who along with Skorzeny established the Kammerandenwerke (escape routes and support for N-zis after the war), Resist Party leader Leon Degrelle, and financial, resource and commodities purveyor Joannes Bernhardt, all of whom had been instrumental in defending the Third Reich.

It’s now apparent that the path to who actually financed the Dallas plot likely begins — and possibly ends — with the banker long-considered one of the brightest minds in world-banking, Hjalmar Schacht, operating in league with those who permitted him to resume his financial career instead of going to prison (or worse) as a convicted N-azi war criminal.
 

Simpson’s research is a fascinating account that emphasizes just how essential Schacht — referred to by Ilse and Otto Skorzeny as “uncle” — was to American interests in pre-post WWII Germany. Well worth the read because it also provides an even deeper appreciation for just how the mechanics of Ilse’s eventual role in the plot to kill Kennedy worked.

It was Donovan’s chief of security, Archbold van Beuren who founded the global real estate concern Previews Inc. Van Beuren returned to Cue Magazine and Previews Inc. after the war and within several years, Ilse Skorzeny was on board Previews, providing her access and cover for travel on a global scale.

We also know that in the lead up to the assassination, Ilse could use the newly opened Dallas office of Previews, Inc. — a building that can be traced to Dallas developer Leo Corrigan who was Ruby’s landlord and an investor in properties in the Bahamas with Clint Murchison, both of whom relied on the contacts of Schacht and Sir Stafford Sands) — as justification for arriving and departing Dallas throughout the summer and fall of 1963.
 

And, we wouldn’t know any of this without Pierre Lafitte. . .
 

From Coup 
Ilse remains “dormant” in Pierre’s world until October 15 when another meeting is held in New York at the offices of Previews Inc., 49 East 53rd, involving General Charles Willoughby. On the 24th, Ilse meets with “T,” and on the 30th, one day following the forty-eight-hour planning session for Lancelot, Pierre makes a note to call Ilse.

To date, the identity of the individual or individuals who served as liaison between the Dallas contingency and Schacht has yet to be determined, but considering that Howard Corp. (an off the books entity of Republic National Bank) was a member of the Texas syndicate in Spain, we can assume someone within the Howard Corp./Republic Bank cabal was directly involved. This places National Socialist banker Hjalmar Schacht in the middle of the Dallas oil and finance community as early as 1952.

 

11:30 meet [Old] Warsaw [restaurant] ( + Hotel) with

T. and Hjalmar / Ilse - Get $

November 7, 1963

Hjalmar Schacht is the key to determining how exactly the bulk of the funds for Lancelot Project flowed. As referenced above, it was likely through the banking black hole of Otto Skorzeny’s business partner, Algur Meadows, executive of Howard Corp, the off-the-books account derived from West Texas Crude lodged in Republic National Bank of Dallas.

Edited April 14, 2023 by Leslie Sharp

[Marjan Rynkiewicz]

Ok -- except.

Schacht was an idiot (ie like 99.99% of american economists).

Schacht was sacked by Hitler.

Schacht had zero to do with Hitler's economic miracle.

Schacht committed  zero war crimes.

And the rest of your jfk wordage is krapp too.

Edited April 14, 2023 by Marjan Rynkiewicz

[Leslie Sharp]

2 hours ago, Marjan Rynkiewicz said:

Ok -- except.

Schacht was an idiot (ie like 99.99% of american economists).

Schacht was sacked by Hitler.

Schacht had zero to do with Hitler's economic miracle.

Schacht committed  zero war crimes.

And the rest of your jfk wordage is krapp too.

JOSEPH MAIER DESCRIBES HJALMAR SCHACHT AT THE NUREMBERG TRIAL. . . with one exception — made the same impression on me,  a very sad, drab impression — the one exception because he had an extraordinary I.Q. was Hjalmar Schacht ... the former Reichsmark president had a very good I.Q.... — Joseph Maier,  from 1940 to 1943 assistant editor for a New York German-Jewish newspaper. In 1944, he worked in the American embassy in Britain as a propaganda analyst. He went to Nuremberg, Germany, as an interpreter in 1946. 
https://encyclopedia.ushmm.org/content/en/oral-history/joseph-maier-escribes-hjalmar-schacht-at-the-nuremberg-trial

E. SCHACHT'S LOSS OF POWER DID NOT IMPLY DISAGREEMENT WITH THE CONSPIRATORS' PROGRAM OF AGGRESSIVE WAR. 

(1) His resignation as Minister of Economics and General Plenipotentiary for War Economy. In November 1937, Schacht resigned his offices as Minister of Economics and General Plenipotentiary for War Economy. At the same time, he accepted appointment as Minister without Portfolio, and continued as President of the Reichsbank. It is submitted that the evidence shows at Schacht's resignations were merely the outgrowth of a clash between two power-seeking individuals, Goering and Schacht, over methods of creating a war economy. and over who should have final authority to direct the completion of the task. So far as appears, Schacht was in full accord with the other conspirators upon the desirability of providing Hitler with the means by which he eventually could carry out his planned aggressions. 

The basic differences between Schacht and Goering date from a period shortly after Goering became head of the Four-Year Plan Office. The latter office was created by Hitler in September 1936, and in connection therewith, Goering was "given far reaching powers to issue directives to all the highest offices of the State Party". Goering conceived of his function as head of the Four-Year Plan Office "within four years to put the entire economy in a state of readiness for war" (EC-408). 

Schacht was in agreement with the "aim and idea" of the Four Year Plan. He promised Goering his complete support and cooperation, and urged that Goering draw upon Schacht's long experience in economic affairs. . . .

 

. . . "*** to waste time in our situation would be the greatest reproach that history could make upon us. 

"May I beg, therefore, once more that the arrangement mentioned be expedited, and that I be notified accordingly." (EC-248) 

Finally, on 7 July 1937, Schacht and Goering signed an agreement of reconciliation in Berlin, wherein it was said that the tasks of Goering and Schacht "are being solved in closest mutual cooperation," and that "no doubt exists about the fact that the Commissioner General for War Economy has the position of a supreme authority of the Reich" 

Schacht resumed his duties as General Plenipotentiary with renewed vigor. On the day following his formal agreement with Goering, he wrote to General von Blomberg on "Measures for the preparation of the conduct of war," pledging continued cooperation in their mutual . . .

 

. . . There is nothing to indicate that Schacht's withdrawal from the Ministry of Economics and the Office of Plenipotentiary for War Economy in any sense represented a break with Hitler on the ground of contemplated military aggression. He consented to retain his position as President of the Reichsbank, where he remained undisputed master, and accepted the post of Minister of Portfolio, in order to be Hitler's "personal adviser." In the letter accepting Schacht's resignation as Minister of Economics, Hitler said: 

"If I accede to your wish it is with the expression of deepest gratitude for your so excellent achievements and in the happy consciousness that, as President of the Reichsbank Directorium, you will make available for the German people and me for many years more your outstanding knowledge and ability and your untiring working strength. Delighted at the fact that in the future, also, you are willing to be my personal adviser, I appoint you as of today a Reich Minister." (L-104). 

As President of the Reichsbank, Schacht continued to carry out Hitler's policies. . . . 

. . . Although Schacht apparently sought to convey the impression to Ambassador Bullitt that he desired to stay Hitler's hand but was powerless to do so, it is clear that he was actually in complete sympathy with Hitler's objectives. Despite the mounting tension which followed his conversation with Ambassador Bullitt, Schacht remained as President of the Reichsbank, and in that capacity established, in advance of the invasion of Austria, the rate of exchange between Marks and Austrian Schillings which was to prevail after the absorption of Austria (EC-421). 

Moreover, under his direction, the Austrian National Bank was merged into the Reichsbank (Reichsgesetzblatt, 1938, I, 254). His speech of 21 March 1938, to the employees of the former Austrian National Bank on the occasion of its obliteration as an independent institution, betrayed his true feelings. After inveighing against "the dictates of Versailles and St. Germain", -Schacht stated: 

"Thank God, these things could after all not hinder the great German people on their way, for Adolf Hitler has created a communion of German will and German thought, he bolstered it up with the newly strengthened Wehrmacht and he then finally gave the external form to the inner union between Germany and Austria." . . . 

. . . (3) Conclusion. Schacht's assistance in the earlier phase of the conspiracy was an important factor in enabling the conspirators to seize the German state and thus pave the way for their later crimes. His 'work was indispensable to the rearmament of Germany and to the economic planning and preparation required to launch the German wars of aggression. As long as he remained in power, he worked as eagerly for the preparation of aggressive war as any of his co-conspirators. He personally was favorably disposed towards aggression, if "Lebensraum" for Germany could not otherwise be attained. He knew that Hitler intended to and would break the peace, and with this knowledge, he willingly and purposely contributed his efforts. His withdrawal from three of his four posts reflected no moral feeling against the use of aggressive warfare as an instrument of national policy; he withdrew for reasons wholly unrelated to Hitler's program of illegal aggression. By the time of his withdrawal from these three positions, he had already provided his co-conspirators with the physical means and economic planning necessary to launch and maintain their wars of aggression; and he continued in his lucrative fourth position (Minister without Portfolio) until January 1943-until, in short, it became doubtful ether the conspirators could maintain the successes which they had gained in the wars they had illegally launched and were waging.

https://www.jewishvirtuallibrary.org/nuremberg-trial-defendants-hjalmar-schacht

Edited April 15, 2023 by Leslie Sharp

[Paul Brancato]

Marian - how would you label Otto Skorzeny? 

[Marjan Rynkiewicz]

1 hour ago, Leslie Sharp said:

JOSEPH MAIER DESCRIBES HJALMAR SCHACHT AT THE NUREMBERG TRIAL. . . with one exception — made the same impression on me,  a very sad, drab impression — the one exception because he had an extraordinary I.Q. was Hjalmar Schacht ... the former Reichsmark president had a very good I.Q.... — Joseph Maier,  from 1940 to 1943 assistant editor for a New York German-Jewish newspaper. In 1944, he worked in the American embassy in Britain as a propaganda analyst. He went to Nuremberg, Germany, as an interpreter in 1946. 
https://encyclopedia.ushmm.org/content/en/oral-history/joseph-maier-escribes-hjalmar-schacht-at-the-nuremberg-trial

E. SCHACHT'S LOSS OF POWER DID NOT IMPLY DISAGREEMENT WITH THE CONSPIRATORS' PROGRAM OF AGGRESSIVE WAR. 

(1) His resignation as Minister of Economics and General Plenipotentiary for War Economy. In November 1937, Schacht resigned his offices as Minister of Economics and General Plenipotentiary for War Economy. At the same time, he accepted appointment as Minister without Portfolio, and continued as President of the Reichsbank. It is submitted that the evidence shows at Schacht's resignations were merely the outgrowth of a clash between two power-seeking individuals, Goering and Schacht, over methods of creating a war economy. and over who should have final authority to direct the completion of the task. So far as appears, Schacht was in full accord with the other conspirators upon the desirability of providing Hitler with the means by which he eventually could carry out his planned aggressions. 

The basic differences between Schacht and Goering date from a period shortly after Goering became head of the Four-Year Plan Office. The latter office was created by Hitler in September 1936, and in connection therewith, Goering was "given far reaching powers to issue directives to all the highest offices of the State Party". Goering conceived of his function as head of the Four-Year Plan Office "within four years to put the entire economy in a state of readiness for war" (EC-408). 

Schacht was in agreement with the "aim and idea" of the Four Year Plan. He promised Goering his complete support and cooperation, and urged that Goering draw upon Schacht's long experience in economic affairs. . . .

 

. . . "*** to waste time in our situation would be the greatest reproach that history could make upon us. 

"May I beg, therefore, once more that the arrangement mentioned be expedited, and that I be notified accordingly." (EC-248) 

Finally, on 7 July 1937, Schacht and Goering signed an agreement of reconciliation in Berlin, wherein it was said that the tasks of Goering and Schacht "are being solved in closest mutual cooperation," and that "no doubt exists about the fact that the Commissioner General for War Economy has the position of a supreme authority of the Reich" 

Schacht resumed his duties as General Plenipotentiary with renewed vigor. On the day following his formal agreement with Goering, he wrote to General von Blomberg on "Measures for the preparation of the conduct of war," pledging continued cooperation in their mutual . . .

 

. . . There is nothing to indicate that Schacht's withdrawal from the Ministry of Economics and the Office of Plenipotentiary for War Economy in any sense represented a break with Hitler on the ground of contemplated military aggression. He consented to retain his position as President of the Reichsbank, where he remained undisputed master, and accepted the post of Minister of Portfolio, in order to be Hitler's "personal adviser." In the letter accepting Schacht's resignation as Minister of Economics, Hitler said: 

"If I accede to your wish it is with the expression of deepest gratitude for your so excellent achievements and in the happy consciousness that, as President of the Reichsbank Directorium, you will make available for the German people and me for many years more your outstanding knowledge and ability and your untiring working strength. Delighted at the fact that in the future, also, you are willing to be my personal adviser, I appoint you as of today a Reich Minister." (L-104). 

As President of the Reichsbank, Schacht continued to carry out Hitler's policies. . . . 

. . . Although Schacht apparently sought to convey the impression to Ambassador Bullitt that he desired to stay Hitler's hand but was powerless to do so, it is clear that he was actually in complete sympathy with Hitler's objectives. Despite the mounting tension which followed his conversation with Ambassador Bullitt, Schacht remained as President of the Reichsbank, and in that capacity established, in advance of the invasion of Austria, the rate of exchange between Marks and Austrian Schillings which was to prevail after the absorption of Austria (EC-421). 

Moreover, under his direction, the Austrian National Bank was merged into the Reichsbank (Reichsgesetzblatt, 1938, I, 254). His speech of 21 March 1938, to the employees of the former Austrian National Bank on the occasion of its obliteration as an independent institution, betrayed his true feelings. After inveighing against "the dictates of Versailles and St. Germain", -Schacht stated: 

"Thank God, these things could after all not hinder the great German people on their way, for Adolf Hitler has created a communion of German will and German thought, he bolstered it up with the newly strengthened Wehrmacht and he then finally gave the external form to the inner union between Germany and Austria." . . . 

. . . (3) Conclusion. Schacht's assistance in the earlier phase of the conspiracy was an important factor in enabling the conspirators to seize the German state and thus pave the way for their later crimes. His 'work was indispensable to the rearmament of Germany and to the economic planning and preparation required to launch the German wars of aggression. As long as he remained in power, he worked as eagerly for the preparation of aggressive war as any of his co-conspirators. He personally was favorably disposed towards aggression, if "Lebensraum" for Germany could not otherwise be attained. He knew that Hitler intended to and would break the peace, and with this knowledge, he willingly and purposely contributed his efforts. His withdrawal from three of his four posts reflected no moral feeling against the use of aggressive warfare as an instrument of national policy; he withdrew for reasons wholly unrelated to Hitler's program of illegal aggression. By the time of his withdrawal from these three positions, he had already provided his co-conspirators with the physical means and economic planning necessary to launch and maintain their wars of aggression; and he continued in his lucrative fourth position (Minister without Portfolio) until January 1943-until, in short, it became doubtful ether the conspirators could maintain the successes which they had gained in the wars they had illegally launched and were waging.

https://www.jewishvirtuallibrary.org/nuremberg-trial-defendants-hjalmar-schacht

Yes there was a conspiracy -- but it was not on German soil. Once again that there wording is all krapp.

And, England & France declared war on Germany.

All of that stuff is of interest to me but not worth arguing over today.

[Marjan Rynkiewicz]

43 minutes ago, Paul Brancato said:

Marian - how would you label Otto Skorzeny? 

I googled. His trial at Dachau was probably in accord with Geneva convention etc.

 I did not read enough to see the details & to see whether Skorzeny should have been found guilty of a war crime -- or perhaps he was but didnt get a death sentence.

A friend of mine (Stan)(polish) was a guard at the Dachau trials. He told me that he  was particularly frightened of one prisoner -- in charge of tanks -- shot about 70 yank prisoners i believe -- but was not given a death sentence.

 

[Leslie Sharp]

41 minutes ago, Marjan Rynkiewicz said:

Yes there was a conspiracy -- but it was not on German soil. Once again that there wording is all krapp.

And, England & France declared war on Germany.

All of that stuff is of interest to me but not worth arguing over today.

If you would like for us to believe you know more than the official record keepers, you'll need to expand beyond "there wording is all krapp," which, btw, makes no sense whatsoever.

It's not worth arguing over today, yet you took the time to launch an argument?

I'm curious why you bother with a thread that you consider "krapp"?
 

 

Edited April 15, 2023 by Leslie Sharp

[Marjan Rynkiewicz]

58 minutes ago, Leslie Sharp said:

If you would like for us to believe you know more than the official record keepers, you'll need to expand beyond "there wording is all krapp," which, btw, makes no sense whatsoever.

It's not worth arguing over today, yet you took the time to launch an argument?

I'm curious why you bother with a thread that you consider "krapp"?
 

 

My main concern was that some readers might get the impression that Schacht was a genius -- he was the typical economist, an idiot.

Otherwise i dont care much about the war -- except that i have spent years reading the non-official records.

But i have zero tolerance for krappynomix. 

But, i thort that this whole jfk ed forum was about members knowing more than the official record keepers.

Edited April 15, 2023 by Marjan Rynkiewicz

[Leslie Sharp]

14 hours ago, Marjan Rynkiewicz said:

My main concern was that some readers might get the impression that Schacht was a genius -- he was the typical economist, an idiot.

Otherwise i dont care much about the war -- except that i have spent years reading the non-official records.

But i have zero tolerance for krappynomix. 

But, i thort that this whole jfk ed forum was about members knowing more than the official record keepers.

Your search - krappynomix - did not match any documents.

Suggestions:

• Make sure all words are spelled correctly.
• Try different keywords.
• Try more general keywords.

[Marjan Rynkiewicz]

5 hours ago, Leslie Sharp said:

Your search - krappynomix - did not match any documents.

Suggestions:

• Make sure all words are spelled correctly.
• Try different keywords.
• Try more general keywords.

Krappynomix is a word that i invented -- to be used in place of krappy ECONOMICS. 

Krappy is based on the standard jargon KRAP or KRAPP.

Nomix is my way of spelling --NOMICS, ie the last parts of econ-nom-ics.

Were u around in Shakespeare's era? U would have loved giving him advice.

But, back to my  question(s).........

..... Why are u on  this forum if u believe the official jfk record keepers?

..... Is it to push the official jfk narrative(s)?

..... Why duz this jfk ed forum exist if everyone should believe the official jfk record keepers?

[Paul Brancato]

Marjan -  Leslie is certainly not an official jfk record keeper. Most of us are not that. 

[Leslie Sharp]

4 minutes ago, Marjan Rynkiewicz said:

Krappynomix is a word that i invented -- to be used in place of krappy ECONOMICS. 

Krappy is based on the standard jargon KRAP or KRAPP.

Nomix is my way of spelling --NOMICS, ie the last parts of econ-nom-ics.

Were u around in Shakespeare's era? U would have loved giving him advice.

But, back to my  question(s).........

..... Why are u on  this forum if u believe the official jfk record keepers?

..... Is it to push the official jfk narrative(s)?

..... Why duz this jfk ed forum exist if everyone should believe the official jfk record keepers?

The record keepers referred to in my post are those whose ancestors experienced the Holocaust, Marjan. And according to their records, Hitler's former favorite banker Hjalmar Schacht should have been sentenced to a term in prison for his  assistance in the earlier phase of the conspiracy was an important factor in enabling the conspirators to seize the German state and thus pave the way for their later crimes. 

You are diverting from the essence of the post which is to reveal that certain US authorities colluded to assure Schacht would resume his career in service to those responsible for his release, and that the relevance of his direct ties to Ilse and Otto Skorzeny and the assassination of Kennedy in Dallas surfaced during Albarelli's investigation.

[Leslie Sharp]

22 minutes ago, Paul Brancato said:

Marjan -  Leslie is certainly not an official jfk record keeper. Most of us are not that. 

Paul, the reference was to the records maintained (i.e., kept) here: https://www.jewishvirtuallibrary.org/nuremberg-trial-defendants-hjalmar-schacht

 

Admittedly, Marjan's responses are a bit confusing:

MR: Yes there was a conspiracy -- but it was not on German soil. Once again that there wording is all krapp.

Does he mean there — as in a location? or their, in which case — who are they?  Does he mean the wording in our book is all krapp, or the wording in the initial post of this thread is all krapp? Or does he mean that the the thorough account of Schacht's role in Hitler's Reich is all krapp?

MR: And, England & France declared war on Germany.

Is he defending the N-azis and rationalizing the Holocaust?

MR: All of that stuff is of interest to me but not worth arguing over today.

Why then is he actually arguing today — albeit in soundbites?  

Edited April 15, 2023 by Leslie Sharp

[Paul Brancato]

It seems rather obvious that at the very least Schacht was no dummy. His post war activities are what interest me. 

[Marjan Rynkiewicz]

38 minutes ago, Leslie Sharp said:

Paul, the reference was to the records maintained (i.e., kept) here: https://www.jewishvirtuallibrary.org/nuremberg-trial-defendants-hjalmar-schacht

 

Admittedly, Marjan's responses are a bit confusing:

MR: Yes there was a conspiracy -- but it was not on German soil. Once again that there wording is all krapp.

Does he mean there — as in a location? or their, in which case — who are they?  Does he mean the wording in our book is all krapp, or the wording in the initial post of this thread is all krapp? Or does he mean that the the thorough account of Schacht's role in Hitler's Reich is all krapp?

MR: And, England & France declared war on Germany.

Is he defending the N-azis and rationalizing the Holocaust?

MR: All of that stuff is of interest to me but not worth arguing over today.

Why then is he actually arguing today — albeit in soundbites?  

As i said i dont want to debate anything about the war (or the holocaust)(or the Nuremberg or Dachau or Berlin trials etc).

But i have zero tolerance for krappynomicysts & their krappynomix -- eg idiots like Schacht.

Re the jfk saga -- i solved the whole thing (ie what happened in Dealey Plaza on that day) in late 2022 -- but i do glance at the forums -- there have been a number of revelations etc by some very clever members.

But revelations karnt of course change what [i said] happened in Dealey Plaza -- what [i said] happened being 100% true.

This present thread is i think about some kind of conspiracy, & it might be 100% true -- but it wont of course change what [i said] happened in Dealey Plaza.

Edited April 16, 2023 by Marjan Rynkiewicz