Empire - A Review

Good afternoon, dear readers! Today, I'm going to review the 2002 release Empire, starring John Leguizamo, Peter Sarsgaard, Delilah Cotto, Denise Richards, Isabella Rossellini, Fat Joe, Treach and a cast of other very good actors.

The Wikipedia article on this movie does not do it justice. This movie is fantastic, and, if more people had paid attention to the myriad storylines within, maybe a lot of those people who fell prey to the likes of Bernard Madoff and the like would have seen what was coming.

John Leguizamo plays Victor Rosa, an entrepreneur (read: dope peddler) in the South Bronx, in the midst of a very sensitive turf war with three other dealers. They all purchase their dope from La Colombiana, played by Isabella Rossellini. As in the real world, the dealers have an identifying name to go with their particular offering; Vic calling his product Empire. He prefers to cut it the least, and develops both a good breed of customer and brand loyalty. His rivals, Tito Severe for example (played by Fat Joe), prefers to deal in quantity and cuts it without regard for purity. Vic is very cunning and has, for the most part, avoided the arrests that are usually prevalent in his line of business. At one point, Vic sets up decoys with wax paper bags filled with crushed graham crackers with "FUCK YOU" stamped on the baggies, thereby faking out the all-too-obvious undercover narcotics teams.

Vic has a beautiful girlfriend, Carmen, played by Delilah Cotto, who, even knowing his business, stands behind her man. It isn't blind loyalty, as you will see later in the movie. I wish to entice you to want to go buy this movie or rent it at Blockbuster or Netflix - it really is that good.

Of course, with any turf war goes the overstepping of boundaries, and this is dealt with quickly and decisively by Vic's crew. The person responsible unwittingly sets off the escalating chain of events that put everyone in danger, and the consequences are frightening.

Carmen's co-worker, Trish, played by Denise Richards, has a boyfriend by the name of Jack Wimmer, played by Peter Sarsgaard. Jack is charismatic, cool, and most importantly, not blind as to the reality of how he makes his living; for that, when he is introduced to Vic, he does not look down upon him; rather, he sees Vic and himself as kindred spirits, and they befriend each other immediately.

Carmen informs Vic that they are pregnant; not long after that, the repercussions of earlier retributions return as a hit is taken on Vic, who is wounded, but not fatally. This gets Vic to thinking about leaving his business, and instead joining Jack in his very lucrative investments. He moves out of the South Bronx into an unused Soho loft, offered by Jack. He begins alienating his former crew for socialite parties with Jack and Trish, something Carmen now regrets.

His first investment pans out to a 200% return; Vic is amazed with the ease at which Jack can make such things happen. When a deal is mentioned that has an even higher rate of return, Vic throws caution to the wind and goes for it...but there are extenuating circumstances. One, he must rein in Jimmy, his former lieutenant, from his hyper-violent proclivities; two, being a million and a half short, he approaches La Colombiana with an offer to include her into the money train - her response to him is that Jimmy must go, and the money is his. Painful decisions are made, and the deal is in the offing.

Of course, this is where the movie parallels recent occurrences - Vic is taken for every cent he's got, and Jack Wimmer disappears...seemingly without a trace. Vic returns to what's left of his former crew and elicits what financial means they have to try out a long shot, which pans out. Of course, Jack Wimmer's fate does not parallel Bernie Madoff's...at least, not as of yet, but if you see this movie, you may ask yourself...why NOT.

Speaking of Bernies...how's my pal, Bernie Kerik...or should I say Inmate #210717? Not so bloody smug anymore, now are we?

Bernie Gets The Max!

So...Bernard Madoff has been sentenced to 150 years in prison.

Good riddance...but the problem still exists: how are WE THE PEOPLE safeguarded from his ilk in the future?

Not by putting the Federal reserve in charge, that's for bloody sure! What's that old adage regarding foxes and henhouses...?

Here's a piece by Mantiq Altayr - Zionist Bullshit - it refers to a piece written by Aron Raskas in the Baltimore Sun - please find that piece below, then go to the link above and read his quite scathing refutation of the "facts" presented.

Settlements are no threat

By Aron U. Raskas

June 7, 2009

As the Obama administration moves to transform Palestinian arguments about Israeli settlements into U.S. policy, an examination of the facts underlying these issues is appropriate. There may be no better place to begin than the swimming pool at Rimonim, a Jewish settlement in the heart of the West Bank.

The scene is a familiar one. Families picnicking together. Mothers yelling at children to be careful. Young children calling out to moms to watch them do dangerous things.

But it is the view from the hilltop pool that is striking. It quickly dispels many of the myths that today masquerade as dogma concerning Jewish settlements in the West Bank.

As one looks out from Rimonim, the most telling fact is what one does not see. Over the miles of rolling hills that unfold across the landscape, there is not a village, building, home or even a herd of sheep to be seen. The scene is the same at other Jewish settlements as well.

Palestinian propaganda machines have for years purveyed the myth of Israeli settlements choking Palestinian communities the way commerce and residential developments have encroached upon rural America. Yet, in reality, nothing like this exists in the largely unsettled expanses of the West Bank.

When Mark Twain walked this land in 1867, he described in his book, Innocents Abroad, this very same "deserted" and "desolate country" with its "rocky and bare" landscape. Today, despite Palestinian efforts to portray it differently, not all that much has changed outside the few towns and villages that dot the land.

Even the pro-Palestinian group Peace Now concedes that Israeli settlements - mostly bedroom communities of Jerusalem or Tel Aviv - occupy less than 3 percent of the West Bank. More than 98 percent of Palestinians already live under the jurisdiction of the Palestinian Authority, and there is no shortage of land there for Palestinian expansion.

Moreover, Israeli professionals living a suburban life with their children in the vast expanse of these territories do not threaten or harm Palestinians. Israeli checkpoints and security measures have been implemented because Palestinians have seemed more interested in destroying Israel and killing Jews than establishing an independent Palestinian state.

Nor are Jewish settlements the result of Israeli colonial aspirations. Most represent the return of the Jewish people to the cities of their ancestors. As Twain painstakingly reported, Jews have lived here since time immemorial, and a drive through these territories highlights the Jewish history - cities, tombs and other landmarks - rooted in this land.

Yet it is not just ancient history that speaks to the great Jewish legacy. The Jewish presence has been a constant right up to modern times. While many bristle at the terms "Judea" and "Samaria," dismissing them as propaganda invented by extremist "settlers" for political ends, maps, photographs, travel guides and other books have throughout history described these territories by those time-honored names. Even United Nations resolutions - including, notably, the 1947 Partition resolution - used those terms.

Given this history, the rights of the Jewish people in these lands are rich, historic and firmly enshrined. While negotiations about sharing this land may be necessary for the sake of peace, they cannot proceed from a premise that these are "Palestinian lands" or occupied "Palestinian territory." They are, at most, "disputed territories."

Indeed, the Oslo Accords firmly recognized the issue of "settlements" as one of the "final status" issues to be addressed by negotiation after other, less difficult, issues were resolved.

It is wrong for the Obama administration to now seek to prejudice that delicate issue with pronouncements adopting the Palestinian narrative and actions designed to preclude the building of additions to homes and new units necessary to accommodate natural growth in existing Jewish settlements.

The thousands of young children who frequent the Rimonim pool look to the future like children anywhere. They seek only to grow up in peace, experience the joys of youth with sufficient room in their homes and schools and, ultimately, have the right to raise families in the communities that nurtured them from birth.

There is no morally sound reason for the Obama administration to challenge these basic rights.

Aron U. Raskas is a Baltimore attorney currently residing in Jerusalem. His e-mail is aronuraskas@gmail.com.

Isn't it sad when someone can just blindly print lies, and without an adjoining comparison piece present? Well, the internet is the Great Equalizer.

Markopolos: I gift wrapped and delivered the largest Ponzi scheme in history to the SEC (And My Appeal Fell Upon Deaf Ears)

This morning, the House Financial Services Subcommittee on Capital Markets, Insurance, and Government Sponsored Enterprises is holding a hearing to assess the alleged $50 billion investment fraud engineered by Mr. Bernard L. Madoff. This is the second in a series of hearings that will help to guide the work of the Financial Services Committee and the Capital Markets Subcommittee in the 111th Congress in undertaking the most substantial rewrite of the laws governing the U.S. financial markets since the Great Depression.

Harry Markopolos, an independent financial fraud investigator for institutional investors and others seeking forensic accounting expertise, as well as a Chartered Financial Analyst and Certified Fraud Examiner, testifies.

Learn more at: http://www.speaker.gov/blog/?p=1675

NYC judge allows Madoff to remain free on bail

NYC judge rules that Bernard Madoff can remain free on bail in Manhattan penthouse

NEW YORK (AP) -- A judge has allowed Bernard Madoff to remain free on bail, rejecting a bid by prosecutors to send the disgraced investor to jail.
Disgraced financier Bernard Madoff leaves U.S. District court after a bail hearing in New York, Monday, Jan. 5, 2009. Prosecutors on Monday said Madoff violated bail conditions by mailing about $1 million worth of jewelry and other assets to relatives and should be jailed without bail. (AP Photo/Kathy Willens)

Disgraced financier Bernard Madoff leaves U.S. District court after a bail hearing in New York, Monday, Jan. 5, 2009. Prosecutors on Monday said Madoff violated bail conditions by mailing about $1 million worth of jewelry and other assets to relatives and should be jailed without bail. (AP Photo/Kathy Willens)

Madoff mailed more than $1 million in jewelry and heirlooms to family and friends over the holidays. Prosecutors said the gifts were grounds to have his bail revoked because what's left of Madoff's assets will have to be returned to burned investors.

The anxiously awaited decision puts further restrictions on Madoff, including forcing him to come up with a list of items at his apartment and allowing a security firm to check on the items.

Defense lawyer Ira Sorkin says the "the opinion speaks for itself and we intend to comply with the judge's order."

Madoff's lawyers said the gifts were an innocent mistake and said he is neither a danger to the community nor a threat to flee.

Is this the biggest load of crap you've ever heard?!? How can any judge worth his salt believe that? They better take his passport!

Life savings gone, 'Madoff-ed' best-selling writer back at work - CNN

That's right...the fallout isn't even halfway done in regards to the Bernard Madoff scandal - read this: Life savings gone, 'Madoff-ed' best-selling writer back at work - now tell me that his "home arrest" is a deterrent to anyone wishing to further defraud investors.

Apparently, there is no appreciable downside to ripping off people en masse, besides a negligible amount of public humiliation, and either a stay in a country club prison, or, better yet, home confinement!

Why rob a bank and risk having your tuchis ruptured by Bubba, who couldn't wait to lube up...just pull a "Madoff"!