German Nuclear Bomb

I just don't like it when people won't even here the counterpoint or immediately wipe it away as if it isn't true or something didn't happen

 

For crying out loud.

1) Corporations, by and large, are amoral.

"lacking a moral sense; unconcerned with the rightness or wrongness of something."

2) Capitalists, seek to maximise profit

"a wealthy person who uses money to invest in trade and industry for profit in accordance with the principles of capitalism."

3) Capitalism, concerns itself primarily with profit.

"an economic and political system in which a country's trade and industry are controlled by private owners for profit, rather than by the state."


But what you are talking about is pure misreading and misdirection;

1 ) Bush was a founding member and one of seven directors of the Union Banking Corporation. It was founded in 1924.
2 ) The bank was an investment bank that operated as a clearing house for many assets and enterprises held by German steel magnate Fritz Thyssen.
3 ) Thyssen welcomed the suppression of the Communist Party, Social Democrats and Trade Unions in 1933.
4 ) In 1937 Thyssen voiced his opposition to the persecution of Catholics in a letter to Hitler.
5 ) In 1938, immediately following Kristalnacht Thyssen resigned in protest as Council of State.
6 ) In 1939, Thyssen was bitterly opposed to the regimes' economic policies that were subordinating everything to munitions and rearmament.
7 ) On the first of September, 1939, Thyssen sent a telegram to Göring stating he was against the war. Fleeing to Switzerland.
8 ) Thyssen was then subsequently expelled from the Nazi Party, and his company nationalised.
9 ) Thyssen moved to France, intending to migrate to Argentina, but was subsequently caught in the invasion visiting his sick mother in Belgium.
10 ) Thyssen was arrested in 1940, and ultimately sent to a Concentration camp in 1943.

11 ) In July 1942, the bank was suspected of holding gold on behalf of Nazi leaders (? It would appear someone wasn't aware of what had happened to Thyssen...)
12 ) A subsequent government investigation disproved those allegations but confirmed the Thyssens' control, seizing those assets for the duration of the war.

13) It wasn't really Prescott Bush's assets that were seized (he had 1 share of 4,000); it was Thyssen's.

Less conspiracy, more facts.

Thyssen was an amoral businessman, that got sucked in with many others with the opinions and emotions in Germany at the time, thinking they could control Hitler. Ultimately though, he understood what Hitler was about, already prior to the war. And not many can say that.

Prescott Bush was helping a fellow businessman; A businessman that was staunchly Anti-communist. (What? Who has ever heard of such a thing?)

 

*bump* for an update-
Not aware of any unexplained areas of radioactivity ever being reported in Germany.
"Documents unearthed in an American archive suggest that Nazi Germany may have tested an operational nuclear bomb before the end of the Second World War.
Recently declassified file APO 696 from the National Archives in Washington is a detailed survey of how far Third Reich scientists got in the development of an atomic bomb - something Hitler craved.
In the file, obtained by the popular daily newspaper Bild, the task of the academics who prepared the paper between 1944 and 1947 was the 'investigations, research, developments and practical use of the German atomic bomb.'
Documents unearthed in an American archive suggest that Nazi Germany may have tested an operational nuclear bomb before the end of the Second World War. Hitler is pictured above
The report was prepared by countless American and British intelligence officers and also includes the testimony of four German experts - two chemical physicists, a chemist and a missile expert.
It concurs that Hitler's scientists failed in the quest to achieve a breakthrough in nuclear technology - but that a documented test may have taken place of a rudimentary warhead in 1944.
The statement of the German test pilot Hans Zinsser in the file is considered evidence: the missile expert says he observed in 1944 a mushroom cloud in the sky during a test flight near Ludwigslust.
His log submitted to the Allied investigators reads; 'In early October 1944 I flew away 12-15 km from a nuclear test station near Ludwigslust (south of Lübeck).
'A cloud shaped like a mushroom with turbulent, billowing sections (at about 7000 metres) stood, without any seeming connections over the spot where the explosion took place. Strong electrical disturbances and the impossibility to continue radio communication as by lighting turned up.'"
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-4252164/Files-suggest-Nazis-tested-NUCLEAR-BOMB-WW2-ended.html#ixzz4ZWeh1XIp

 

I've read the entire Zinsser account - and the various shortened/edited versions floating around with the bits that would allow verification....or not!...removed LOL

First of all - as a Luftwaffe "rocketry expert" he's sent to observe something and told that its a "nuclear testing station"??? In Hitler's Germany?

Second - that's only part, and a very very short extract, of Zinsser's report - let alone his description of the event....which in the full report is described by Zinsser as looking like the explosion at Hiroshima.

Lightning? Flashing fissile byproducts in the cloud? Unfortunately, Tibbetts' description of the mushroom cloud at Hiroshima was a coal-black cloud, no lightning or flashing lights

Finally - all the edits of Zinsser's account seems to leave out his statement that he was diverted away from the location due to USAAF nightfighters operating in his vicinity. Funny none of these American pilots reported anything similar explosion, mushroom cloud, flashing lights, lightning OR radio interference....that's if they existed. I wonder if anyone has actually checked if any US fighters were operating in the area that night?

O that's right....that sentence is carefully removed from most transcripts of Zinsser's account so very very few readers would even get to KNOW there's something could be corroborated - or not

As for APO 696 - that sounds like so much after-the-fact intelligence gathering - the really BAD intelligence gathering. First, form an opinion....THEN look for information/data corroborating it. Germany "of course" had a Bomb, we've been spying on their efforts for years, they MUST have had one...

When in fact the art of good intelligence analysis is taking ALL the available data - for AND against a given posit - and making a judgement call on the basis of ALL of it. We used the same weakness on the part of the Germans to fool them into thinking the Second Front would be in the Pas de Calais , or Norway...and in 1940 the Nazis convinced themselves that British morale was falling apart from a few newspaper reports of people being prosecuted and (Tiny) fined for spreading rumour and despondency...

But WE were exactly as vulnerable to the same mistake! For example - we believed utterly in the so-called "Alpine Redoubt", and interreted every action of the Nazis in the last few weeks of the war in terms of it actually existing....when it was really a figment of the imagination.

 

Mushroom clouds can also be produced by conventional explosives. Didn't some of the British soldiers in ODS report what they thought was the US detonating a nuclear weapon which turned out to be a FAE?

 

nonexistent.

 

Actually, Germany achieved the worlds first sustained chain reaction about two months before the US did, although it was in a "cold reactor" rather than a hot one. Using methane it was self regulating - when it warmed up it would shut down until it cooled - see Brooks Hitler's Nuclear Weapons. If you want a comprehensive, international, fully documented Atomic History Timeline 1937-1957 - send me your email address. It is quotes rather than a thesis, and it is not from any national point of view, but universal.

 

Absolutely correct. I saw the ammo dump go up at Da Nang. From about two miles offshore. We all "knew" the Russians or Chinese had attacked, or maybe we set off an atomic demolition munition by mistake ? But after about 30 seconds I declared "that isn't a nuclear weapon!" Why my shipmates asked. "Because we didn't go blind, in spite of ignoring our training not to look at one unprotected" Sure enough, it was conventional munitions.

 

Surely a radioactivity test around these supposed sites would tell one way or the other?
"when it warmed up it would shut down until it cooled" - Sounds like the chain reaction/cascading snuffed the fire out...bit like blowing too hard on a small flame...Fusion has this problem...interesting.

 

It has been done, the results showed that nothing had happened in those locations. But, that has not stopped the "uber-German" fanboys from contesting the results.
Trinity, on the other hand, is still noticeably radioactive, even after decades, and several cleanups.

Map of Trinity Site Ionizing Radiation

Thermal expansion...As it heats up, it will expand. By expanding the atoms move further apart, therefore less and less collisions occur, until the reaction is no longer self sustaining. Once, cooled and contracted, the reaction will re-initiate.

This is fission, fusion has it's own unique problems at room temperatures.

 

Hardly conclusive...As Brooks, in another book of his, attests to German made flying saucers, anti-gravity machines, and German contact with extraterrestrials. "Hitler's Nuclear Weapons" reminds me of Charles Berlitz & his books, long on speculation that is based on few facts.

 

Not up to Velikovsky's standards or is that a reasonable comparison as well?

 

"The point is that the whole structure of the relationship between the scientist and the state in Germany was such that although we were not 100% anxious to do it, on the other hand we were so little trusted by the state that even if we had wanted to do it, it would not have been easy to get it through.”
-Heisenberg

All significant work on the German Atomic project was halted in June of 1942. The Germans never achieved a successful, sustained chain reaction, could not enrich uranium, nor seriously considered plutonium as a viable substitute. Heisenberg recalled in his memoir, “The government decided that work on the reactor project must be continued, but only on a modest scale. No orders were given to build atomic bombs” (Powers). Speer later noted, “We got the view that the development was very much at the beginning… the physicists themselves didn’t want to put much into it” (Powers), and that “the technical prerequisites for production would take years to develop, two years at the earliest, even provided that the program was given maximum support” (Rhodes). The very scarce German resources were allocated to other priorities.

The pressures Germany faced meant all resources had to be allocated to the immediate war effort.

References:
Powers, T. Heisenberg's War: The Secret History of the German Bomb. Boston, MA: Da Capo Press, 2000.
Rhodes, R. The Making of the Atomic Bomb. New York, NY: Simon & Schuster, 1986.

'...Germany was not on the verge of having a working reactor during World War II. “The report corroborates the observations of the Alsos Mission’s team and long-held assumptions by Manhattan Project historians about the fledgling efforts made to develop an atomic bomb under Nazi Germany,” says Cynthia C. Kelly, president of the Atomic Heritage Foundation, in Washington, D.C.'
Nuclear Forensics Shows Nazis Were Nowhere Near Making Atomic Bomb | October 5, 2015 Issue - Vol. 93 Issue 39 | Chemical & Engineering News

So, no, they didn't achieve the first sustained chain reaction before the US. Furthermore, there is no evidence that they ever achieved sustained chain reactions during the war. Let's reiterate; There is no evidence whatsoever. The "reactor" built at Haigerloch, didn't work as it could not achieve criticallity, and was therefore, not self-sustaining. Seems like a waste in 1944, to build a reactor that wasn't going to work, if they had already succeeded 2 years earlier.

What Otto Hahn had done, in 1938/1939, was successfully fission Uranium into lighter materials. Then Hahn continued non-weapon related work discovering elements and isotopes.

 

The US neglected the U235 bomb in 1940-41 despite repeated British urging. Lyman Briggs, the head of the Amerivan uranium committee, simply kept the startling optimistic British reports in his safe, declining to show them to his colleagues.

From Heisenberg and the Nazi atomic Bomb project by Paul Lawrence Roae

 

There is far more to it than Mr. Rose's simplistic statement.

1. It was not a U235 bomb, but a natural uranium bomb comprising Mostly of U238.

2. American scientists, namely Edward Teller had calculated that some 30 tons would be needed to get a proper chain reaction explosion, as opposed to a fizzle.

3. The Americans were looking at U235, but were hampered by a lack of funding(they had to fight just to get the initial $6,000 dollars to conduct their initial experiments), and a lack of resources(there was little readily available U238, and only a miniscule supply of U235.

4. The British scientists were in contact with their American counterparts, so their location of their reports are immaterial, but as your author says they were optimistic.

5. FDR basically left the Briggs report lay doggo, taking no action on it for many months.

There is much, much more. I would suggest reading Richard Rhoades masterful time - The Making of the Atomic Bomb...As well as his other 3 books on the history of nuclear weapons.