Showing posts with label financial collapse. Show all posts
Showing posts with label financial collapse. Show all posts

Wednesday, November 4, 2009

Samizdat - 11/04/2009


• NIST balks on 9/11 Truth challenge • Dorothy Kilgallen story to hit big screen • Gorbachev calls for American/global perestroika • US income gap world's most extreme • Canadian singer/songwriter killed by coyotes

Twin Towers, Twin Myths?

The NIST vs. Architects & Engineers for 9/11 Truth. Challenged to conduct its own testing of WTC dust samples for nanothermite, the NIST crawls under a rock

by JAY LEVIN AND TOM MCKENZIE
Santa Barbara Independent News
http://www.independent.com/news/2009/sep/17/twin-towers-twin-myths/

One of the crucial technical disputes in American history, perhaps second only to global warming, is underway. It pits hundreds of government technicians who say the World Trade Center buildings were brought down by airplane impact against hundreds of professional architects and building engineers who insist that the Twin Towers could never have collapsed solely due to the planes and are calling for a new independent investigation. It is a fight that is not going away and is likely to get louder as more building trade professionals sign on to one side or the other.

Stephen Jones said he sent a letter in April 2008 to NIST about his original findings (nanothermite chips found in WTC dust samples), inviting NIST to test its own dust for such chips. In public comments since, NIST has said that Jones’s research is not “scientifically valid” because Jones can’t prove the “chain of custody” of the dust he tested...

Other groups that support NIST’s findings argue that neither the samples nor Jones’s tests are reliable. Jones replied simply: “They don’t need my dust to test. They have plenty of dust of their own where they know the chain of custody. They just won’t test it.”...

To Richard Gage and his allies, NIST’s refusal to test and its questionable conclusions derive from government-dependent employees and defense contractors fearful that evidence of explosives would be too traumatic for the public — and too risky to NIST captains answerable to political superiors. Hence, NIST’s refusal to address fully scientific papers challenging nearly every element of its case, including its theory that pneumatic air pressure mimicked explosives and that tons of nano-thermite (not less-powerful thermite) would be needed...

Inevitably, of course, the gorilla in the room is what if AE911 and the Jones team are correct in their analysis? The dark notion that the hijackers wouldn’t need airplanes if they could plant explosives would raise questions of who did have access and what was their motive? And how would America deal with such an investigation against the backdrop of suppositions that some officials in government were complicit? This idea is virtually unthinkable to most of the public, much less something the American political system can handle. A Democratic Congress wouldn’t cut off funds for a war it opposed nor impeach a president who broke laws; how would it cope with the cataclysmic implications of new 9/11 evidence that disproved the official story?

Results of the Santa Barbara Independent's poll on this story:

Tragic, but no conspiracy. Planes hit them, they went down -- 23%

More than meets the eye; let's investigate -- 22%

Inside job; we MUST investigate -- 53%

__________________________________________________________________

Dorothy Kilgallen story optioned for big screen biopic
October 3rd, 2008 by Scott Marks
http://www.emulsioncompulsion.com/2008/10/03/news/dorothy-kilgallen-story-optioned-for-big-screen-biopic

According to Variety, producer John Davis (Dudley Do-Right, I Robot, Fat Albert, Norbit) has optioned Good Night, Dorothy Kilgallen, a proposal for an expose book by Paul Alexander that ties the columnist’s death to her investigation of the JFK assassination. Kilgallen was an outspoken critic of the Warren Commission. A friend of JFK’s, she began a crusade to single-handedly uncover a conspiracy behind his murder. She conducted an interview with assassin’s assassin Jack Ruby that purported to contain important new information on the murder of President Kennedy. She conceived the interview as a centerpiece for her expose Murder One, Alexander’s book insists that Kilgallen died mysteriously and the notebooks containing the information she was about to publish disappeared.

Wonder why the MSM has steadfastly endorsed the Warren Commission and refused to investigate the triple assassinations of the '60s? Virtually alone among journalists with a national audience (syndicated column and radio show), Dorothy Kilgallen pursued the case. Her sudden death put a chill on the Fourth Estate that's still in effect. While journalists circle the wagons over federal pressure to reveal confidential sources, or the recent White House attacks on Fox News, few have cared to examine this seminal case of lethal intimidation.

1. On July 15, 1959 Kilgallen became the first reporter to imply that the CIA was working with organized crime to knock off Fidel Castro.

2. On Sept. 25, 1964, Kilgallen ran an interview with Acquilla Clemons, one of the witnesses to the shooting of Officer Tippit whom the Warren Commission never questioned. Clemons told Kilgallen that she saw two men running from the scene, neither of whom fit Oswald's description.

3. The same month, she reported in the New York Journal American that Jack Ruby and slain DPD officer J.D. Tippet had a two-hour meeting in Ruby's Carousel Club.

3. One of the biggest scoops of Kilgallen's career came when she obtained the 102-page transcript of Ruby's testimony to the Warren Commission (wherein Ruby begged to be taken from Dallas to Washington, where he could tell the whole truth).

4. Dorothy's last public reference to the JFK assassination appeared on Sept. 3, 1965 when she challenged the authenticity of the famous Life magazine cover of Lee Harvey Oswald

After a trip to New Orleans (anticipating Jim Garrison's investigation), and a private interview with Jack Ruby in his Dallas jail cell, she told several friends and associates that she was "about to blow the JFK case sky high." Shortly afterward, she was found dead in her townhouse, and all of her notes from the Ruby interview and New Orleans trip vanished. Seven days after Kilgallen's loss, Dr. James Luke, a New York City medical examiner, said she died from "acute ethanol and barbiturate intoxication, circumstances undetermined."

A good account of the case here:

WHO KILLED DOROTHY KILGALLEN?

By Sara Jordan
Thursday November 1st 2007

http://www.midtod.com/new/articles/7_14_07_Dorothy.html

____________________________________________________________________

Mikhail Gorbachev calls for global perestroika

Twenty years after that shameful symbol of division was torn down, ultra-liberal capitalism needs its own perestroika

http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2009/oct/30/1989-capitalism-in-crisis-perestroika

http://rawstory.com/08/news/2009/06/09/mikhail-gorbachev-calls-for-new-american-revolution/

But it was soon very clear that western capitalism, too, deprived of its old adversary and imagining itself the undisputed victor and incarnation of global progress, is at risk of leading western society and the rest of the world down another historical blind alley.

Today's global economic crisis was needed to reveal the organic defects of the present model of western development that was imposed on the rest of the world as the only one possible; it also revealed that not only bureaucratic socialism but also ultra-liberal capitalism are in need of profound democratic reform – their own kind of perestroika...

“Some have reacted with understanding. Others have objected, sometimes sarcastically, suggesting that I want the United States to experience upheaval, just like the former Soviet Union. In my country, particularly caustic reactions have come from the opponents of perestroika, people with short memories and a deficit of conscience,

“[If] all the proposed solutions and action now come down to a mere rebranding of the old system, we are bound to see another, perhaps even greater upheaval down the road,” he wrote. “The current model does not need adjusting; it needs replacing. I have no ready-made prescriptions. But I am convinced that a new model will emerge, one that will emphasise public needs and public good, such as a cleaner environment, well-functioning infrastructure and public transport, sound education and health systems and affordable housing.”

He continued: “The time has come to strike the right balance between the government and the market, for integrating social and environmental factors and demilitarising the economy.”

______________________________________________________________________________

US Rich-Poor Income Gap World's Most Extreme
Dullophob.com
10-29-9
http://www.rense.com/general88/extreme.htm

Income inequality in the US is now the most extreme of all countries. The 2008 OECD report 'Income Distribution and Poverty in OECD Countries' concludes that the US is the country with the highest inequality and poverty rate across the OECD and that since 2000 nowhere has there been such a stark rise in income inequality as in the US. The OECD finds that in the US the distribution of wealth is even more unequal than the distribution of income.

The increase in US income inequality in the 21st century coincides with the offshoring of US jobs, which enriched executives with 'performance bonuses' while impoverishing the middle class, and with the rapid rise of unregulated OTC derivatives, which enriched Wall Street and the financial sector at the expense of everyone else. Millions of Americans have lost their homes and half of their retirement savings while being loaded up with government debt to bail out the banksters who created the derivative crisis. The financial insiders running the Treasury, White House, and Federal Reserve (Rubin, Greenspan etc.) shifted to taxpayers the cost of the catastrophe that they had created. Goldman Sachs, saved with the public's money, recently announced that it was paying massive six and seven figure bonuses to every employee.
__________________________________________________________________________

Some people think I'm nuts for carrying a small .22 revolver on wilderness hikes. Once I was attacked on a mountain bike by wild dog. It's rare, but these things do happen, and calling 911 on your cell phone will only get the coroner there in time...

Taylor Mitchell, Singer-Songwriter, Killed By Coyotes On Hike In Canadian Park
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2009/10/28/taylor-mitchell-singerson_n_337836.html

TORONTO — Two coyotes attacked a promising young musician as she was hiking alone in a national park in eastern Canada, and authorities said she died Wednesday of her injuries. The victim was identified as Taylor Mitchell, 19, a singer-songwriter from Toronto who was touring her new album on the East Coast.

She was hiking solo on a trail in Cape Breton Highlands National Park in Nova Scotia on Tuesday when the attack occurred. She was airlifted to a Halifax hospital in critical condition and died Wednesday morning, authorities said.


Travis Kelly Graphics
http://www.tkellygraphics.com

Editorial & History Cartoons
http://www.traviskelly.com

CafePress:
Cartoons on T-Shirts, Posters, Calendars, Mugs and more
http://www.cafepress.com/traviskelly

Wednesday, October 28, 2009

Samizdat - 10/28/2009


Two Smackdowns • The U.S. as Failed State • Russia's Daring Vote

TWO SMACKDOWNS

Al Franken eviscerates a Stepford spokeswoman from the Hudson Institute on medical bankruptcies. Anyone who thought "Stuart Smiley" would be a lightweight in the Senate is wrong -- he's tough, well-prepared and he doesn't pull any punches:

"How many medical bankruptcies were there in Switzerland last year?"

"How many medical bankruptcies were there in France last year?"

http://www.dailykos.com/storyonly/2009/10/22/795842/-Watch-Franken-slice-and-dice-the-nice-wingnut-lady-(updated-w-transcript)

MSNBC anchor Dylan Ratigan takes on Chamber of Commerce chief Tom Donohue:

Ratigan: "Unless the government and people like you that lobby to the exemptions that allow banks to [speculate with taxpayer money] get out of the way, we will never have fair play again in this country and we'll have job creation by virtue of taxpayer theft, which is ultimately destructive, and I would argue, treasonous to this country... Especially when you talk nonsense."

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2009/10/14/dylan-ratigan-to-chamber_n_320397.html


________________________________________________________


The US as Failed State

By PAUL CRAIG ROBERTS

http://www.counterpunch.com/roberts10222009.html


The US has every characteristic of a failed state.

The US government’s current operating budget is dependent on foreign financing and money creation.

Too politically weak to be able to advance its interests through diplomacy, the US relies on terrorism and military aggression.

Costs are out of control, and priorities are skewed in the interest of rich organized interest groups at the expense of the vast majority of citizens. For example, war at all cost, which enriches the armaments industry, the officer corps and the financial firms that handle the war’s financing, takes precedence over the needs of American citizens. There is no money to provide the uninsured with health care, but Pentagon officials have told the Defense Appropriations Subcommittee in the House that every gallon of gasoline delivered to US troops in Afghanistan costs American taxpayers $400.

“It is a number that we were not aware of and it is worrisome,” said Rep. John Murtha, chairman of the subcommittee.

According to reports, the US Marines in Afghanistan use 800,000 gallons of gasoline per day. At $400 per gallon, that comes to a $320,000,000 daily fuel bill for the Marines alone. Only a country totally out of control would squander resources in this way.

While the US government squanders $400 per gallon of gasoline in order to kill women and children in Afghanistan, many millions of Americans have lost their jobs and their homes and are experiencing the kind of misery that is the daily life of poor third world peoples. Americans are living in their cars and in public parks. America’s cities, towns, and states are suffering from the costs of economic dislocations and the reduction in tax revenues from the economy’s decline. Yet, Obama has sent more troops to Afghanistan, a country half way around the world that is not a threat to America.

It costs $750,000 per year for each soldier we have in Afghanistan. The soldiers, who are at risk of life and limb, are paid a pittance, but all of the privatized services to the military are rolling in excess profits. One of the great frauds perpetuated on the American people was the privatization of services that the US military traditionally performed for itself. “Our” elected leaders could not resist any opportunity to create at taxpayers’ expense private wealth that could be recycled to politicians in campaign contributions.

Republicans and Democrats on the take from the private insurance companies maintain that the US cannot afford to provide Americans with health care and that cuts must be made even in Social Security and Medicare. So how can the US afford bankrupting wars, much less totally pointless wars that serve no American interest?

The enormous scale of foreign borrowing and money creation necessary to finance Washington’s wars are sending the dollar to historic lows. The dollar has even experienced large declines relative to currencies of third world countries such as Botswana and Brazil. The decline in the dollar’s value reduces the purchasing power of Americans’ already declining incomes.

Despite the lowest level of housing starts in 64 years, the US housing market is flooded with unsold homes, and financial institutions have a huge and rising inventory of foreclosed homes not yet on the market.

Industrial production has collapsed to the level of 1999, wiping out a decade of growth in industrial output.

The enormous bank reserves created by the Federal Reserve are not finding their way into the economy. Instead, the banks are hoarding the reserves as insurance against the fraudulent derivatives that they purchased from the gangster Wall Street investment banks.

The regulatory agencies have been corrupted by private interests. Frontline reports that Alan Greenspan, Robert Rubin, and Larry Summers blocked Brooksley Born, the head of the Commodity Futures Trading Commission from regulating derivatives. President Obama rewarded Larry Summers for his idiocy by appointing him Director of the National Economic Council. What this means is that profits for Wall Street will continue to be leeched from the diminishing blood supply of the American economy.

An unmistakable sign of third world despotism is a police force that sees the pubic as the enemy. Thanks to the federal government, our local police forces are now militarized and imbued with hostile attitudes toward the public. SWAT teams have proliferated, and even small towns now have police forces with the firepower of US Special Forces. Summons are increasingly delivered by SWAT teams that tyrannize citizens with broken down doors, a $400 or $500 repair born by the tyrannized resident. Recently a mayor and his family were the recipients of incompetence by the town’s local SWAT team, which mistakenly wrecked the mayor’s home, terrorized his family, and killed the family’s two friendly Labrador dogs.

If a town’s mayor can be treated in this way, what do you think is the fate of the poor white or black? Or the idealistic student who protests his government’s inhumanity?

In any failed state, the greatest threat to the population comes from the government and the police. That is certainly the situation today in the USA. Americans have no greater enemy than their own government. Washington is controlled by interest groups that enrich themselves at the expense of the American people.

The one percent that comprise the superrich are laughing as they say, “let them eat cake.”



_________________________________________________________________________

Russia's Daring Vote

By ISRAEL SHAMIR

http://www.counterpunch.com/shamir10222009.html

Russia's vote to endorse the Goldstone Gaza report in the United Nations Human Rights Council last Friday was an important, milestone event both for Palestine and for Russia. For Palestine, this vote opened a way to try and sentence Israeli mass-murderers, and thus ushered Israel into a new era of responsibility after a long period of Wild West-style, Colt-45 justice. For Russia, this vote has proved to its own country and to the world that it is free from American and Zionist diktat and able to navigate its own policy...

Many people doubted his impartiality: Goldstone is a Jew -- a self-described Zionist, well-connected to Israel – he sits on the board of its University and his daughter even lived in Tel Aviv for a while. Goldstone was guided by his conscience and not by his blood. He went to Gaza, invested a lot of time and effort, and concluded: Israel has committed war crimes and crimes against humanity. He recommended the case be transferred to the ICC court in the Hague. Israel did not cooperate and tried to undermine and block the report, but failed. That was the first Israeli defeat...

Israel was infuriated by this development. The Jewish State considered itself invulnerable behind the triple defense of the Sixth Fleet, the US Senate and the Holocaust Museum. President Obama's soft request to freeze the settlement building was met in Tel Aviv by what Internet chat calls "lol". He was ridiculed. Ehud Barak and Bibi Netanyahu even sped up their building plans in the West Bank and East Jerusalem in order to show that they could not care less. And now, all of a sudden, Jewish ministers of state are going to be judged as if they were Serbs or Sudanese.

Israeli leaders activated their main reserves, the US State Department and the Lobby. A few days ago I spoke with Martin Indyk, former US ambassador to Tel Aviv, and he confirmed that the US State Department will do all it can to stop the Goldstone report before it gets to the Security Council. Another American veto would not look good. Worse, an insulted and hurt Obama might just forget to veto an anti-Israeli decision...

A few years ago I wrote: "The world needs Russia, for since her star was obscured in 1990, for almost twenty years the runaway train of US and the loose cannon of Israel made a mess on the planet. Russia must stop their orgy of aggression and regain its place as the ultimate protector of the weak and the meek. This is her manifest destiny". The Geneva vote proved that Russia has done just that. We may once again connect our hopes with Russia in her friendship with China. They also can stop Israel from hurting itself and others.

So many people in the US and France, in Egypt and Palestine are tired of Israeli intransigence, egotism, hypocrisy and impunity. That is why so much hope was invested in Barack Obama after his Cairo talk. Obama had promised to cut Israel down to size, but meanwhile Israel cut him down to smaller-than-life. That is why the US is going down just like the Titanic, undermined by a Lobby iceberg and fleeced by financial wizards. Now Russia is coming under tremendous pressure from the US and other Zionist-led groups and states. We should pray she will withstand it and maintain her and our dignity.


Travis Kelly Graphics
http://www.tkellygraphics.com

Editorial & History Cartoons
http://www.traviskelly.com

CafePress:
Cartoons on T-Shirts, Posters, Calendars, Mugs and more
http://www.cafepress.com/traviskelly

Sunday, October 25, 2009

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?

Monday, August 3, 2009

The Entire Monetary System Is A Ponzi Scheme

From: Freedom is truth in action (397063550)
To: (443289640)
Date: 8/3/2009 11:17:06 AM
Subject: The Entire Monetary System is a Ponzi Scheme...

-..-..-------------- Bulletin Message -..-..---------------
From: Orwellian Bob (405851800)
To: (462124578)
Date: 8/3/2009 10:43:28 AM
Subject: Entire Monetary System is a Ponzi Scheme...


-........-........-........-------------- Bulletin Message -........-........---------------
From: ♪♫URiAH♫♪ (171649204)
To: (405851800)
Date: 7/27/2009 8:46:25 AM
Subject: Spitzer: Federal Reserve is ‘a Ponzi scheme, an inside job’


Spitzer: Federal Reserve is ‘a Ponzi scheme, an inside job’



By Daniel Tencer

Published: July 25, 2009
Updated 2 days ago

The Federal Reserve — the quasi-..​autonomous body that controls the US’s money supply — is a “Ponzi scheme” that created “bubble after bubble” in the US economy and needs to be held accountable for its actions, says Eliot Spitzer, the former governor and attorney-..​general of New York.

In a wide-ranging discussion of the bank bailouts on MSNBC’s Morning Meeting, host Dylan Ratigan described the process by which the Federal Reserve exchanged $13.9 trillion of bad bank debt for cash that it gave to the struggling banks.

Spitzer — who built a reputation as “the Sheriff of Wall Street” for his zealous prosecutions of corporate crime as New York’s attorney-..​general and then resigned as the state’s governor over revelations he had paid for prostitutes — seemed to agree with Ratigan that the bank bailout amounts to “America’s greatest theft and cover-up ever.”

Advocating in favor of a House bill to audit the Federal Reserve, Spitzer said: “The Federal Reserve has benefited for decades from the notion that it is quasi-..​autonomous,​ it’s supposed to be independent. Let me tell you a dirty secret: The Fed has done an absolutely disastrous job since [former Fed Chairman] Paul Volcker left.

“The reality is the Fed has blown it. Time and time again, they blew it. Bubble after bubble, they failed to understand what they were doing to the economy.

“The most poignant example for me is the AIG bailout, where they gave tens of billions of dollars that went right through — conduit payments — to the investment banks that are now solvent. We [taxpayers] didn’t get stock in those banks, they didn’t ask what was going on — this begs and cries out for hard, tough examination.

“You look at the governing structure of the New York [Federal Reserve], it was run by the very banks that got the money. This is a Ponzi scheme, an inside job. It is outrageous, it is time for Congress to say enough of this. And to give them more power now is crazy.

“The Fed needs to be examined carefully.”

Spitzer resigned as governor of New York in March, 2008, after news reports stated he had paid for a $1,000-an-hour New York City call girl.

At the time, Spitzer had been raising the alarm about sub-prime mortgages. In the wake of the economic meltdown triggered last fall by sub-prime loans, some observers have suggested that Spitzer may have been targeted by law enforcement because of his high-profile opposition to Wall Street financial policies.

Investigative reporter Greg Palast wrote that federal agents’ revealing of Spitzer’s identity as a call-girl customer was no coincidence.

Palast wrote that the principle of “prosecutorial discretion” is often used to keep the names of high-profile persons out of the media when they are tangentially linked to a criminal investigation. In the case of Spitzer, the Justice Department chose not to invoke prosecutorial discretion.

Funny thing, this ‘discretion.’ For example, Senator David Vitter, Republican of Louisiana, paid Washington DC prostitutes to put him in diapers (ewww!), yet the Senator was not exposed by the US prosecutors busting the pimp-ring that pampered him.

Naming and shaming and ruining Spitzer – rarely done in these cases - was made at the ‘discretion’ of Bush’s Justice Department.

Spitzer recently told Bloomberg News that President Obama’s regulatory reforms of the financial sector are “irrelevant” because regulatory agencies have not been enforcing corporate laws to begin with.

“Regulatory agencies already had the power to do everything they needed to do,” he said. “They just affirmatively chose not to do it.”

– Daniel Tencer

The following video was broadcast on MSNBC’s Morning Meeting, Friday, July 24, 2009, and uploaded to YouTube July 25, 2009
:




http:​/​/rawstory.com/​08/news/2009/07/25/​spitzer-federal-reserve-is-​a-ponzi-scheme-an-​inside-​job/​

Tuesday, July 21, 2009

No Longer Alone...Ron Paul Fights The Fed! Wall Street Journal

No Longer Alone Ron Paul Fights the Fed! Wall Street Journal

Thanks to Uncle Sam (472250938) Darla 4 RON PAUL (73060206) & Dreamer (50584125)
No Longer Alone Ron Paul Fights the Fed!

Source
By Sudeep Reddy

Rep. Ron Paul usually stands far outside the mainstream in Congress, particularly in his campaign to kill the Federal Reserve. But the Texas Republican now has the bulk of his colleagues standing alongside him in a fight against the central bank’s autonomy.

His bill to audit the Fed, just three pages long, has 274 co-sponsors — every House Republican and almost 100 Democrats — and counting. “People are upset,” he says. “People are demanding more transparency of the Fed, and they’re supporting me on this.”

The longtime Fed critic would prefer an economy without a central bank, where the market sets interest rates and troubled firms are left to sink. He blames the Fed for the past century’s financial bubbles and worries about its ability to monetize debt to finance government spending, even though Fed officials insist they’d never allow it.

Mr. Paul sees transparency as a first step in making the public more aware of the Fed’s ability to electronically print money to support the banking system. The revelations from an audit will “expose to the American people exactly how the Federal Reserve operates,” he says. “Because when they fully understand how they operate, what they do, how they manipulate monetary policy and interest rates, they will finally figure out that it’s the Fed that has caused all the mischief.”

Most of the lawmakers who have signed on as co-sponsors of the legislation don’t share Mr. Paul’s anti-Fed stance. They say Congress has an oversight role and needs a full accounting of how much money the Fed has lent — and to whom.

Some lawmakers signed up as an expression of disapproval after learning more about the Fed’s decisions to lend money to firms such as AIG. Many others say greater scrutiny is critical before any discussion of expanding the Fed’s authority in other areas, as the Obama administration proposes. “Bringing transparency and accountability to the Federal Reserve through an audit will help ensure that tax dollars are not wasted,” said Rep. John Boehner of Ohio, the House’s top Republican.

Rep. Brad Sherman, a California Democrat, says none of the Depression-era lawmakers who gave the Fed its power to lend to non-financial institutions “ever thought it would involve trillions of dollars.” He said the Fed system’s unique structure, with private officials leading the regional Fed banks, also needs a review by congressional auditors. “Anyone exercising governmental power should be subjected to governmental oversight.”

Even lawmakers who are less eager to sign on acknowledge the momentum. If the Fed gets added responsibilities, “there wouldn’t be any question in my mind that a bill would be passed,” said Rep. Paul Kanjorski, a senior Democrat who has not taken a position on the legislation. “They would have to buy into much more regular audit control of the Fed.”

Mr. Paul recognizes that his movement to audit the central bank ultimately may help the Obama administration expand the Fed’s oversight role in the economy.

“I think what they’ll do is they’ll give in to some of the transparency at the same time they’ll give them more power,” Mr. Paul said. “We’re going to be bugging you a lot more. We’re going to be keeping eyes on you. That might be the way. Maybe inadvertently I’ll help them get more power at the Fed.”


I posted at the WSJ blog page, that if we do not nationalize the Federal reserve, we should all get ready to be paid in RICE.

Wednesday, October 29, 2008

Jesse "Mind & Body" Ventura Talks Sense; Voter Intimidation Once Again Rears Its Ugly-Ass Head; Google Follies

Since it was so perfectly stated by the blogger, I'll let him speak (my comment to follow):

"This is just one of several segments on "the Tube" but all worth checkin' out - I have to say that Ventura is one helluva' spokesman for the truth movement because he speaks in common sense terms and really gets to the heart of the matter. I no longer wonder why he isn't covered more by the mainstream media - they can't have him on because the questions he is asking are so obvious. I can go on and on but will simply repeat myself - please watch the following video and keep yourself informed. I hope by posting this I am keeping some readers apprised of the growing truth movement - that it is a grass roots movement - from the bottom up - getting bigger every day...anyway please watch the following and the rest on YouTube."

Posted by jack rabbit at 9:44 PM
1 comments:

Anonymous said...

It would seem to me that the only way to get an honest report on 911 is to redact the Government. Start fresh and examine all the obviously illogical components eg. BBC reporting WTC7 falling before it did, and the engineering reports showing temperatures insufficient to produce structural failure from jet fuel. A quote I vagely remember goes 'if everything is impossible then whatever remains, no matter how unlikely, is the truth'


hANOVER fIST says:

I don't wish to bore you by repeating ad nauseum what has occurred in the past...but clearly, when abuses of power and outright failure and/or incompetence are rewarded, and whistle-blowing or forthright behaviour is met with hostility, harassment and loss of employment, we have a case of the foxes running the henhouse...and contrary to former Fed Chairman Alan Greenspan, the only interest the financial industry has is MONEY.

They are beholden ONLY to MONEY.

Long-term investment, nor the well-being of the stock market, or of the United States of America, for that matter, means BUPKIS to them...and so, there was never any incentive whatsoever to rein in ill-advised transactions.




In other news...some tools don't seem to understand the idea of voting, and that it should NOT be discouraged:



Published on HamptonRoads.com | PilotOnline.com (http://hamptonroads.com)
Phony flier says Virginians vote on different days

RICHMOND

A phony State Board of Elections flier advising Republicans to vote on Nov. 4 and Democrats on Nov. 5 is being circulated in several Hampton Roads localities, according to state elections officials.

In fact, Election Day, for voters of all political stripes, remains Nov. 4.

The somewhat official-looking flier - it features the state board logo and the state seal - is dated Oct. 24 and indicates that "an emergency session of the General Assembly has adopted the follwing (sic) emergency regulations to ease the load on local electorial (sic) precincts and ensure a fair electorial process."

The four-paragraph flier concludes with: "We are sorry for any inconvenience this may cause but felt this was the only way to ensure fairness to the complete electorial process."

No emergency action has been taken by the General Assembly. It is not in session and lacks the authority to change the date of a federal election.

State Board of Election officials today said they are aware of the flier but disavowed any connection to it.

"It's not even on our letterhead; they just copied the logo from our Web site," said agency staffer Ryan Enright, noting the flier has been forwarded to State Police for investigation as a possible incident of voter intimidation.

Election officials did not specify in which Hampton Roads localities the flier had been spotted.

State Police are aware of the complaint and are looking into it, said spokeswoman Corinne Geller.

In 2007, the General Assembly passed a law making it a Class 1 misdemeanor to knowingly communicate false information to registered voters about the date, time and place of the election or voters' precincts, polling places or voter registration statuses in order to impede their voting. The measure is one of the few such deceptive voting practice laws in the country, according to the watchdog group Common Cause.

Julian Walker, (804) 697-1564, dale.eisman@pilotonline.com


Let's see some prosecutions for this disenfranchisement of the voting public.

Check out this information on privacy information and Google:

Tuesday, October 14, 2008

FOX News: World Bank Under Cyber Siege in 'Unprecedented Crisis' by Richard Behar

World Bank Under Cyber Siege in 'Unprecedented Crisis'

Friday , October 10, 2008
By Richard Behar

The World Bank Group's computer network — one of the largest repositories of sensitive data about the economies of every nation — has been raided repeatedly by outsiders for more than a year, FOX News has learned.

It is still not known how much information was stolen. But sources inside the bank confirm that servers in the institution's highly-restricted treasury unit were deeply penetrated with spy software last April. Invaders also had full access to the rest of the bank's network for nearly a month in June and July.

In total, at least six major intrusions — two of them using the same group of IP addresses originating from China — have been detected at the World Bank since the summer of 2007, with the most recent breach occurring just last month.

In a frantic midnight e-mail to colleagues, the bank's senior technology manager referred to the situation as an "unprecedented crisis." In fact, it may be the worst security breach ever at a global financial institution. And it has left bank officials scrambling to try to understand the nature of the year-long cyber-assault, while also trying to keep the news from leaking to the public.

Click here to see the e-mail.

Click here to visit FOXNews.com's Cybersecurity Center.

The crisis comes at an awkward moment for World Bank president Robert Zoellick, who runs the world's largest and most influential anti-poverty agency, which doles out $25 billion a year, and whose board represents 185 member nations. This weekend, the bank holds its annual series of meetings in Washington — and just in advance of those sessions, Zoellick called for a radical revamping of multilateral organizations in light of the global economic meltdown.

Zoellick is positioning himself and the bank as an institution that can help chart a new path toward global financial stability. But that reputation, more than ever, depends on the bank's stable information infrastructure.

The fact that the information vaults of the World Bank have been repeatedly pried open won't help Zoellick's case.

While it remains unclear how much data has been pilfered from the bank, it's a lot. According to internal memos, "a minimum of 18 servers have been compromised," including some of the bank's most sensitive systems — ranging from the bank's security and password server to a Human Resources server "that contains scanned images of staff documents."

Click here to see bank memos about the intrusions.

One World Bank director tells FOX News that as many as 40 servers have been penetrated, including one that held contract-procurement data.

Despite the gravity of the break-ins, the bank is trying hard to pretend to outsiders it didn't happen. "There were attempts to hack the bank's computer systems last summer," says a World Bank spokesman. "However, there was no compromise of confidential information." Requests for on-the-record interviews with Zoellick and other top officials were declined.

Meanwhile, the bank's treasurer, Kenneth G. Lay, has been briefing Zoellick's senior management team regularly on the situation since April.

Other bank officials are also sleuthing. The bank's chief information officer, Guy De Poerck, has engaged Price Waterhouse Coopers to do a confidential million-dollar assessment that is expected to tell him what's going on in his own department. And a 22-page internal report by a computer security company named MANDIANT, dated August 18, fleshes out many details of the June-July breaches. But very few people have ever seen the report, and nobody has been permitted to retain a paper copy.

At the same time, De Poerck has been downplaying the problem to the bank's 10,000 rank-and-file staffers as mere intrusion "attempts" in his e-mails. Yet most of those staffers have been asked to change their password three times in the past three months.

"As previously reported in mid-July," CIO De Poerck and a senior bank treasury official wrote in an August announcement to employees, "we would like to reassure you that there is no evidence that Bank staff personal information is at risk from the recent external attempts."

It's unclear how that statement squares with an internal memo to De Poerck a month earlier revealing that a sensitive Human Resources server "that contains scanned images of staff documents" had been successfully breached. De Poerk declined to comment to FOX News about any of these details.

Click here to see De Poerck's memo.

In reality, the situation is serious enough that federal investigators have been called in. "We're not talking about hackers playing games or messing up our website," insists a senior member of the bank's IT department at its Washington headquarters. "It's about the FBI coming last summer and saying, 'You should take a look at your systems because we think something weird is going on.' It's about the intruders knowing what information they wanted — and getting to it whenever they wanted to. They took our existing data stores and organized them in a way that they could be easily accessed at will."

In plainspeak: "They had access to everything," says the source. "They had the keys to every room at the bank. And we can't say whether they still do or don't until we fully and openly address what's happening here."

The data raids are not a matter of stealing inconsequential bits and bytes. The World Bank's data center is literally a treasure trove of vital financial information from around the globe. As a clearinghouse for financial data from both governments and companies, the bank's computers could provide intruders with both a financial and intelligence gold mine — from inside information on bids and contracts to the minutes of confidential board meetings.

If the bank takes a position in a currency, for example, that currency usually moves in response to the bank's actions. Stocks and bonds can also swing up and down based on World Bank announcements. "If you know beforehand that the bank is going to put an order in for oil pipelines in Chad or healthcare systems in India, you can actually make a good amount of money," says one insider.

Although the bank typically provides only a fraction of the financing for a project, its influence on those projects is immense. Private corporations see the bank's stamp of approval as a guarantee that their own larger investments will be safe — and profitable. Knowing in advance what projects the bank's board will reject could be just as profitable.

Some insiders fear that contractors — perhaps even governments — might be seeking advance knowledge on the status of the bank's anti-corruption probes. "The bank knows the books of countries almost as well as the countries do — including the corruption at times," says one insider.

The first breach of the bank's secrets was discovered in September, 2007, after the FBI —while at work on a different cybercrime case — notified the bank that something was wrong. The feds pointed to a part of the bank's network that led out of the Johannesburg hub of the International Finance Corp. (IFC), a bank arm that lends to the private sector.

Within a week of the tip, teams of bank investigators sent to Johannesburg discovered that intruders had gained full and total access to all of IFC's worldwide information — including all incoming and outgoing e-mail — for at least six months. "They were downloading everything and anything," says one insider, who says that IFC's monitoring systems were extremely weak. "They [intruders] had full access."

Investigators discovered that the intruders were using a so-called "cluster" of IP addresses from Macao, China. But since those addresses can be spoofed (i.e., disguised) the discovery doesn't prove that the breaches actually originated in China. Nonetheless, bank officials and its executive director for China clashed behind closed doors over whether or not China's government is involved in the break-ins.

Bank sources tell FOX News that Johannesburg is one of several secret "hubs" containing a "common data store" (or CDS) that the World Bank Group has established around the globe. In layman's terms, a CDS is the cyber-world's version of a bomb shelter where every piece of an organization's data is replicated and backed up in case of a data-wipeout at headquarters in Washington. While it's known that IFC data was accessible at the hub, it remains unclear if all World Bank Group data was compromised there.

The second major breach — of the bank's treasury network in Washington — was discovered in April 2008. The World Bank's Treasury manages $70 billion in assets for 25 clients — including the central banks of some countries. It carries out substantial collaborations with the world's finance ministers on public wealth and debt management, runs an active bond-trading desk in Washington, and does everything from currency trading to capital markets financings.

After a forensic analysis of the treasury breach, bank investigators discovered that spy software was covertly installed on workstations inside the bank's Washington headquarters — allegedly by one or more contractors from Satyam Computer Services, one of India's largest IT companies.

The software — which operates through a method known as keystroke logging — enabled every character typed on a keyboard to be transmitted to a still-unknown location via the Internet.

Upon its discovery, insiders report, bank officials shut off the data link between Washington and Chennai, India, where Satyam has long operated the bank's sole offshore computer center responsible for all of the bank's financial and human resources information.

Satyam was also banned from any future work with the bank. "I want them off the premises now," Zoellick reportedly told his deputies. But at the urging of CIO De Poerck, Satyam employees remained at the bank as recently as Oct. 1 while it engaged in "knowledge transfer" with two new India-based contractors.

Satyam — one of the largest and most prestigious IT companies in India — is publicly listed on the NYSE and boasts having $2 billion in sales and more than 150 Fortune 500 companies as clients. In 2003, Satyam — it means "truth" in Sanskrit — won a much-heralded and lucrative five-year "sole source" contract to design, write and maintain all of the World Bank's information systems.

The contract — which began at $10 million and grew to more than $100 million by 2007 — was suddenly not renewed this year. Satyam so far declines to comment.

Then came the June-July breaches in Washington. They were similar to the Johannesburg attack, as the same group of IP addresses from Macao were used.

This time, however, the cyber-burglars used a different spyware. They broke into an external server run by the bank's private sector development unit. They were able to acquire passwords — including the password for the systems administrator.

That enabled them to jump into the servers at MIGA, the bank's giant insurance arm. It was there that they captured the security administrator's password as he was logging on to his computer.

It took ten days for bank officials to detect that they'd been invaded. Once they did, they shut down all external servers, except for e-mail — which it turns out the invaders were already using as their entrance point. By the end of July the invaders "had completely mapped out the topography of the bank's information systems," says one expert — "where everything was, the types of servers, and the types of files on the servers."

What the intruders did with all that information is the World Bank's most sensitive and painful mystery. It has clearly left the institution in a highly vulnerable position.

And the same may go for bank president Zoellick. Bank insiders say that he needs desperately to get the security of his own house in order. Despite the vast sums that the Bank spends on data and data storage, its information systems are deeply in disarray.

Today the total cost to maintain the bank's information infrastructure is at least $280 million per year. But according to one disgruntled bank staffer, "We don't even have an internal search engine that works."

The truly alarming fact, however, is that someone — or many people — seem to know their way around the bank's most valuable resource very well, even though they aren't supposed to be there at all.

UPDATE: After FOX News published its story, a World Bank spokesman issued the following statement:

"The Fox News story is wrong and is riddled with falsehoods and errors. The story cites misinformation from unattributed sources and leaked emails that are taken out of context.

"Like other public and private institutions, the World Bank has repeatedly experienced hacking attacks on its computer systems and is constantly updating its security to defeat these. But at no point has a hacking attack accessed sensitive information in the World Bank's Treasury, procurement, anti-corruption or human resources departments."

FOX News stands by its story.

Thursday, October 9, 2008

A Vote For McCain/Palin Is Like Chickens Voting For Colonel Sanders


Just remember - 26 years of voting for DE-REGULATION for financial institutions, as opposed to "that one's" FISA vote and his "bailout/American ripoff" vote.

Let's spell it out, so even the slow kids can understand:

Twenty-six years of saying, "Oh, sure, the market can regulate itself...I'm SURE that NO ONE will GAME THE SYSTEM for their OWN INTEREST"...nosiree, bob.

America need John "Songbird" McCain and Sarah "Flintstones" Palin like Jennifer Levin needed Robert Chambers.

I'm a Republican, and I'm sick of the muttonheads that have been chosen to represent my party in the last thirty-odd years.

Sick.

Here's Keating Economics:

Tuesday, October 7, 2008

The Obama Campaign Just Launched a Nuke At the McCain Campaign

Posted by berni_mccoy in General Discussion: Presidential
Mon Oct 06th 2008, 07:59 AM
And it just arrived in my email.

Here it is folks: McCain and the Keating 5

Over the weekend, John McCain's top adviser announced their plan to stop engaging in a debate over the economy and "turn the page" to more direct, personal attacks on Barack Obama.

In the middle of the worst economic crisis since the Great Depression, they want to change the subject from the central question of this election. Perhaps because the policies McCain supported these past eight years and wants to continue are pretty hard to defend.

But it's not just McCain's role in the current crisis that they're avoiding. The backward economic philosophy and culture of corruption that helped create the current crisis are looking more and more like the other major financial crisis of our time.

During the savings and loan crisis of the late '80s and early '90s, McCain's political favors and aggressive support for deregulation put him at the center of the fall of Lincoln Savings and Loan, one of the largest in the country. More than 23,000 investors lost their savings. Overall, the savings and loan crisis required the federal government to bail out the savings of hundreds of thousands of families and ultimately cost American taxpayers $124 billion.

Sound familiar?

In that crisis, John McCain and his political patron, Charles Keating, played central roles that ultimately landed Keating in jail for fraud and McCain in front of the Senate Ethics Committee. The McCain campaign has tried to avoid talking about the scandal, but with so many parallels to the current crisis, McCain's Keating history is relevant and voters deserve to know the facts -- and see for themselves the pattern of poor judgment by John McCain.

So at noon Eastern on Monday, October 6th, we're releasing a 13-minute documentary about the scandal called "Keating Economics: John McCain and the Making of a Financial Crisis" -- it will be available at KeatingEconomics.com, along with background information that every voter should know.

Watch a preview right now and share it with your friends.

The point of the film and the web site is that John McCain still hasn't learned his lesson.

And this time, McCain's bankrupt economic philosophy has put our economy at the brink of collapse and put millions of Americans at risk of losing their homes.

Watch the video to see why John McCain's failed philosophy and poor judgment is a recipe for deepening the crisis:

http://my.barackobama.com/keatingvideo


It's no wonder John McCain would rather spend the last month of this election smearing Barack's character instead of talking about the top priority issue for voters.

But if we work together, we can make sure the focus stays on the economy -- and how to fix it.

Please forward this email to everyone you know.

Thanks,

David

David Plouffe
Campaign Manager
Obama for America

P.S. -- The documentary will be live at noon Eastern at www.KeatingEconomics.com.


Hey...not familiar enough with the background of the Keating Five scandal?

Dear readers...never say that I left you hanging:

CHAPTER VII: THE KEATING FIVE

As a war hero and U.S. senator, John McCain has been chronicled in pictures.

There are grainy mug shots of a young McCain, printed in U.S. newspapers after his jet was shot down over North Vietnam. There are black-and-white images of his return, grinning and waving.

In happier times, there is McCain holding his newborn daughter while his wife, Cindy, smiles from her hospital bed.

But it is an innocent vacation picture that carries the reminder of the scandal that threatened his political career.

In the picture, taken in the Bahamas, McCain is seated on a bandstand while wearing an outrageous straw party hat. Next to him on the dais sits Charles Keating III, son of developer Charles H Keating Jr.

McCain calls the Keating scandal "my asterisk." Over the years, his opponents have failed to turn it into a period.

It all started in March 1987. Charles H Keating Jr., the flamboyant developer and anti-porn crusader, needed help. The government was poised to seize Lincoln Savings and Loan, a freewheeling subsidiary of Keating's American Continental Corp.

As federal auditors examined Lincoln, Keating was not content to wait and hope for the best. He had spread a lot of money around Washington, and it was time to call in his chits.

One of his first stops was Sen. Dennis DeConcini, D-Ariz.

The state's senior senator was one of Keating's most loyal friends in Congress, and for good reason. Keating had given thousands of dollars to DeConcini's campaigns. At one point, DeConcini even pushed Keating for ambassador to the Bahamas, where Keating owned a luxurious vacation home.

Now Keating had a job for DeConcini. He wanted him to organize a meeting with regulators to deliver a message: Get off Lincoln's back. Eventually, DeConcini would set up a meeting with five senators and the regulators. One of them was McCain.

McCain already knew Keating well. His ties to the home builder dated to 1981, when the two men met at a Navy League dinner where McCain spoke.

After the speech, Keating walked up to McCain and told him that he, too, was a Navy flier and that he greatly respected McCain's war record. He met McCain's wife and family. The two men became friends.

Charlie Keating always took care of his friends, especially those in politics. McCain was no exception.

In 1982, during McCain's first run for the House, Keating held a fund-raiser for him, collecting more than $11,000 from 40 employees of American Continental Corp. McCain would spend more than $550,000 to win the primary and the general election.

In 1983, as McCain contemplated his House re-election, Keating hosted a $1,000-a-plate dinner for him, even though McCain had no serious competition. When McCain pushed for the Senate in 1986, Keating was there with more than $50,000.

By 1987, McCain had received about $112,000 in political contributions from Keating and his associates.

McCain also had carried a little water for Keating in Washington. While in the House, McCain, along with a majority of representatives, co-sponsored a resolution to delay new regulations designed to curb risky investments by thrifts such as Lincoln.

Reluctant participant

Despite his history with Keating, McCain was hesitant about intervening. At that point, he had been in the Senate only three months. DeConcini wanted McCain to fly to San Francisco with him and talk to the regulators. McCain refused.

Keating would not be dissuaded.

On March 24 at 9:30 a.m., Keating went to DeConcini's office and asked him if the meeting with the regulators was on. DeConcini told Keating that McCain was nervous.

"McCain's a wimp," Keating replied, according to the book Trust Me, by Michael Binstein and Charles Bowden. "We'll go talk to him."

Keating had other business on Capitol Hill and did not reach McCain's office until 1:30. A DeConcini staffer already had told McCain about the "wimp" insult.

When he arrived, Keating presented McCain with a laundry list of demands for the regulators.

McCain told Keating that he would attend the meeting and find out whether Keating was getting treated fairly but that was all.

The first meeting, on April 2, 1987, in DeConcini's office, included Ed Gray, chairman of the Federal Home Loan Bank Board, as well as four senators: DeConcini, McCain, Alan Cranston, D-Calif., and John Glenn, D-Ohio.

(Years later, McCain recalled that DeConcini started the meeting with a reference to "our friend at Lincoln." McCain characterized it as "an unfortunate choice of words, which Gray would remember and repeat publicly many times.")

For Keating, the meeting was a bust. Gray told the senators that as head of the loan board, he worried about the big picture. He didn't have any specific information about Lincoln. Bank regulators in San Francisco would be versed in that, not him. Gray offered to set up a meeting between the senators and the San Francisco regulators.

The second meeting was April 9. The same four senators attended, along with Sen. Don Riegle, D-Mich. Also at the meeting were William Black, then deputy director of the Federal Savings and Loan Insurance Corp., James Cirona, president of the Federal Home Loan Bank of San Francisco, and Michael Patriarca, director of agency functions at the FSLIC.

In an interview with The Republic, Black said the meeting was a show of force by Keating, who wanted the senators to pressure the regulators into dropping their case against Lincoln. The thrift was in trouble for violating "direct investment" rules, which prohibited S&Ls from taking large ownership positions in various ventures.

"The Senate is a really small club, like the cliche goes," Black said. "And you really did have one-twentieth of the Senate in one room, called by one guy, who was the biggest crook in the S&L debacle."

Black said the senators could have accomplished their goal "if they had simply had us show up and see this incredible room and said, 'Hi. Charles Keating asked us to meet with you. 'Bye.'"

McCain previously had refused DeConcini's request to meet with the Lincoln auditors themselves. In Worth the Fighting For, McCain wrote that he remained "a little troubled" at the prospect, "but since the chairman of the bank board didn't seem to have a problem with the idea, maybe a discussion with the regulators wouldn't be as problematic as I had earlier thought."

McCain concedes that he failed to sense that Gray and the thrift examiners felt threatened by the senators' meddling.

'Always Hamlet'

The five senators, including McCain, seemed like a united front to Black.

"They presented themselves as a group," Black said, "and DeConcini is the dad, who's going to take the primary speaking role. Both meetings are in his office, and in both cases it's we want this, with no one going, 'What do you mean we, kemo sabe?'"

According to nearly verbatim notes taken by Black, McCain started the second meeting with a careful comment.

"One of our jobs as elected officials is to help constituents in a proper fashion," McCain said. "ACC (American Continental Corp.) is a big employer and important to the local economy. I wouldn't want any special favors for them. . . .

"I don't want any part of our conversation to be improper."

Black said the comment had the opposite effect for the regulators. It made them nervous about what might really be going on.

"McCain was the weirdest," Black said. "They were all different in their own way. McCain was always Hamlet . . . wringing his hands about what to do."

Glenn, a former astronaut and the first American to orbit the Earth, was not as tactful.

"To be blunt, you should charge them or get off their backs," he told the regulators. "If things are bad there, get to them. Their view is that they took a failing business and put it back on its feet. It's now viable and profitable. They took it off the endangered species list. Why has the exam dragged on and on and on?"

DeConcini added: "What's wrong with this if they're willing to clean up their act?"

Cirona, the banking official, told the senators that it was "very unusual" to hold a meeting to discuss a particular company.

DeConcini shot back: "It's very unusual for us to have a company that could be put out of business by its regulators."

The meeting went on. McCain was quiet. DeConcini carried the ball. The regulators told the senators that Lincoln was in trouble. The thrift, Cirona said, was a "ticking time bomb."

Then Patriarca made a stunning comment, according to transcripts released later.

"We're sending a criminal referral to the Department of Justice," he said. "Not maybe, we're sending one. This is an extraordinarily serious matter. It involves a whole range of imprudent actions. I can't tell you strongly enough how serious this is. This is not a profitable institution."

The statement made DeConcini back off a little.

"The criminality surprises me," he said. "We're not interested in discussing those issues. Our premise was that we had a viable institution concerned that it was being overregulated."

"What can we say to Lincoln?" Glenn asked.

"Nothing," Black responded, "with regard to the criminal referral. They haven't and won't be told by us that we're making one."

"You haven't told them?" Glenn asked.

"No," said Black. "Justice would skin us alive if we did. Those referrals are very confidential. We can't prosecute anyone ourselves. All we can do is refer it to Justice."

After the meeting, McCain was done with Keating.

"Again, I was troubled by the appearance of the meeting," McCain said later. "I stated I didn't want any special favors from them. I only wanted them (Lincoln Savings) to be fairly treated."

Black doesn't completely buy that argument. If McCain was concerned about Keating asking him to do things that were improper, why go to either meeting at all?

Black said McCain probably went because Keating was close to being the political godfather of Arizona and McCain still had plenty of ambition.

"Keating was incredibly powerful," Black said. "And incredibly useful."

McCain's reservations aside, Keating accomplished his goal. He had bought some time, though the price was very high.

Short-lived reprieve

A month later, the San Francisco regulators finished a yearlong audit and recommended that Lincoln be seized. But the report was virtually ignored because of politics on the bank board.

Gray was being replaced as chairman by Danny Wall, who was more sympathetic to Keating.

The audit, which described Lincoln as a thrift reeling out of control, sat on a shelf.

In September 1987, the investigation was taken away from the San Francisco office, away from Black and Patriarca. In May 1988, it was transferred to Washington, where Lincoln would get a new audit.

It was a win for Keating. A battle, not the war.

Back in San Francisco, Black was fuming.

"Clearly, we were shot in the back," he would say later.

Despite the reprieve, Keating's businesses continued to spiral downward, taking the five senators with him. Together, the five had accepted more than $300,000 in contributions from Keating, and their critics added a new term to the American lexicon: "The Keating Five."

The Keating Five became synonymous for the kind of political influence that money can buy. As the S&L failure deepened, the sheer magnitude of the losses hit the press. Billions of dollars had been squandered. The five senators were linked as the gang who shilled for an S&L bandit.

S&L "trading cards" came out. The Keating Five card showed Charles Keating holding up his hand, with a senator's head adorning each finger. McCain was on Keating's pinkie.

As the investigation dragged through 1988, McCain dodged the hardest blows. Most landed on DeConcini, who had arranged the meetings and had other close ties to Keating, including $50 million in loans from Keating to DeConcini's aides.

But McCain made a critical error.

He had adopted the blanket defense that Keating was a constituent and that he had every right to ask his senators for help. In attending the meetings, McCain said, he simply wanted to make sure that Keating was treated like any other constituent.

Keating was no ordinary constituent to McCain.

On Oct. 8, 1989, The Arizona Republic revealed that McCain's wife and her father had invested $359,100 in a Keating shopping center in April 1986, a year before McCain met with the regulators.

The paper also reported that the McCains, sometimes accompanied by their daughter and baby-sitter, had made at least nine trips at Keating's expense, sometimes aboard the American Continental jet. Three of the trips were made during vacations to Keating's opulent Bahamas retreat at Cat Cay.

McCain also did not pay Keating for some of the trips until years after they were taken, after he learned that Keating was in trouble over Lincoln. Total cost: $13,433.

When the story broke, McCain did nothing to help himself.

"You're a liar," McCain said when a Republic reporter asked him about the business relationship between his wife and Keating.

"That's the spouse's involvement, you idiot," McCain said later in the same conversation. "You do understand English, don't you?"

He also belittled reporters when they asked about his wife's ties to Keating.

"It's up to you to find that out, kids."

The paper ran the story.

In his 2002 book, McCain confesses to "ridiculously immature behavior" during that particular interview and adds that The Republic reporters' "persistence in questioning me about the matter provoked me to rage."

"I don't know how (The Republic journalists) would have reported the story had I been more civil and understanding or just more of a professional during the interview," McCain wrote.

At a news conference after the story ran, McCain was a changed man. He stood calmly for 90 minutes and answered every question.

On the shopping center, his defense was simple. The deal did not involve him. The shares in the shopping center had been bought by a partnership set up between McCain's wife and her father. (The couple also had a prenuptial agreement that separated Cindy McCain's finances and dealings from his.)

But McCain also had to explain his trips with Keating and why he didn't pay Keating back right away.

On that score, McCain admitted he had fouled up. He said he should have reimbursed Keating immediately, not waited several years. His staff said it was an oversight, but it looked bad, McCain jetting around with Keating, then going to bat for him with the federal regulators.

"I was in a hell of a mess," McCain later would write.

Meanwhile, Lincoln continued to founder.

In April 1989, two years after the Keating Five meetings, the government seized Lincoln, which declared bankruptcy. In September 1990, Keating was booked into Los Angeles County Jail, charged with 42 counts of fraud. His bond was set at $5 million.

During Keating's trial, the prosecution produced a parade of elderly investors who had lost their life's savings by investing in American Continental junk bonds.

Verdict: 'Poor judgment'

In November 1990, the Senate Ethics Committee convened to decide what punishment, if any, should be doled out to the Keating Five.

Robert Bennett, who would later represent President Bill Clinton in the Paula Jones case, was the special counsel for the committee. In his opening remarks, he slammed DeConcini but went lightly on McCain, the lone Republican ensnared with four Democrats.

"In the case of Senator McCain, there is very substantial evidence that he thought he had an understanding with Senator DeConcini's office that certain matters would not be gone into at the meeting with (bank board) Chairman (Ed) Gray," Bennett said.

"Moreover, there is substantial evidence that, as a result of Senator McCain's refusal to do certain things, he had a fallout with Mr. Keating."

Among the Keating Five, McCain took the most direct contributions from Keating. But the investigation found that he was the least culpable, along with Glenn. McCain attended the meetings but did nothing afterward to stop Lincoln's death spiral.

Lincoln was the most expensive failure in the national S&L scandal. Taxpayers lost more than $2 billion on the bailout. McCain also looked good in contrast to DeConcini, who continued to defend Keating until fall 1989, when federal regulators filed a $1.1 billion civil racketeering and fraud suit against Keating, accusing him of siphoning Lincoln's deposits to his family and into political campaigns.

In January 1993, a federal jury convicted him of 73 counts of wire and bankruptcy fraud in the collapse of American Continental and Lincoln. Keating was sentenced to 12 years and seven months in prison but served just 50 months before the conviction was overturned on a technicality. In 1999, at age 75, he pleaded guilty to four counts of fraud. He was sentenced to time served.

In the end, McCain received only a mild rebuke from the Ethics Committee for exercising "poor judgment" for intervening with the federal regulators on behalf of Keating. Still, he felt tarred by the affair.

"The appearance of it was wrong," McCain said. "It's a wrong appearance when a group of senators appear in a meeting with a group of regulators because it conveys the impression of undue and improper influence. And it was the wrong thing to do."

McCain noted that Bennett, the independent counsel, recommended that McCain and Glenn be dropped from the investigation.

"For the first time in history, the Ethics Committee overruled the recommendation of the independent counsel," McCain said. For his part, DeConcini is critical of McCain's role in the affair. The two senators never were particularly cozy, and the stress of the public scrutiny worsened their relations.

In his memoir Senator Dennis DeConcini: From the Center of the Aisle, he praises the decision to keep McCain on the hook.

"It became clear to me, and it was later confirmed by Ethics Committee members, that Bennett was attempting to dismiss the charges against McCain, and in order to appear nonpartisan, he included Glenn in this effort," DeConcini wrote with co-author Jack August. "Thanks to the three Democrats on the committee and perhaps with the help of Senator (Jesse) Helms (R-N.C.), however, the charges remained in place for all the senators under investigation. So all of us had to attend the 23-day public hearing, which was indeed a trial, before the six-member Senate Ethics Committee."

In the book, DeConcini reiterates his allegation that McCain leaked to the media "sensitive information" about certain closed proceedings in order to hurt DeConcini, Riegle and Cranston. It's a fairly serious charge. The Boston Globe revisited the Keating Five leaks in 2000. The story paraphrased a congressional investigator, Clark B. Hall, as personally concluding that "McCain was one of the principal leakers." The newspaper also reported that McCain, under oath, had denied involvement with the leaks.

McCain owns up to his mistake this way:

"I was judged eventually, after three years, of using, quote, poor judgment, and I agree with that assessment."

Tuesday, September 30, 2008

Let Risk-Taking Financial Institutions Fail (kudos to Travis Kelly)

Let Risk-Taking Financial Institutions Fail

The Administration and Congress have felt compelled to do something about the "financial meltdown," so an inefficient and inequitable "bailout plan" has been rushed through the legislature despite harsh criticism from the right and left. That's unfortunate. Both presidential candidates were stalling by qualifying the plan. Whichever candidate had had the courage to reject outright this proposal would have had the better claim to be President.

Do not be fooled. The $700 billion (ultimately $1 trillion or more) bailout is not predominantly for mortgages and homeowners. Instead, the bailout is for mortgage-backed securities. In fact, some versions of these instruments are imaginary derivatives. These claims overlap on the same types of mortgages. Many financial institutions wrote claims over the same mortgages, and these are the majority of claims that have "gone bad."

Follow the money. Average Joes and Janes are not the holders of the other side of complicated, over-the-counter derivatives contracts. Rather, hedge funds are the main holders. The bailout will involve a transfer of wealth — from the American people to financial institutions engaging in reckless speculation — that will be the greatest in history...

Rescuing financial institutions is not the best solution. Yes, banks are needed to provide capital to businesses. But it is not necessary to spend $1 trillion to maintain liquidity. If the government is to intervene, it should pick and choose which claims to purchase; claims that are directly tied to mortgages would be a good start.

Let financial institutions fail, merge or be bought out. The faltering institutions will see their shares devalued and will be likely to be taken over by stronger institutions — as has already started happening. This consolidation of the financial sector is both efficient and inevitable; government action can only delay the adjustment.

The government should not intervene. It should leave overleveraged financial institutions to default on their derivatives obligations and, if necessary, file for bankruptcy. Much of the crisis has arisen from miscalculating the risks involved in a large book of positions in these derivatives. It is only logical that these institutions pay for their poor management.

Rather than bailing out Wall Street, we propose that the government should buy up the actual mortgages in question and do nothing else. The government should not touch any derivatives; that is, claims that do not directly tie into the actual mortgages. If money becomes too tight, then the Fed can certainly increase its loans to financial institutions.

Let the poorly managed, overly risk-taking financial institutions fail! Always remember that Wall Street and the real economy are not the same thing.

— Ari J. Officer has completed his master of science degree in financial mathematics at Stanford University. Lawrence H. Officer is a professor of economics at the University of Illinois at Chicago.

Sunday, September 28, 2008

Massachusetts Proposal Would Repeal Income Tax

Great headline - Massachusetts Proposal Would Repeal Income Tax.

Let's get into it...many of the opponents begin with the usual caveats..."oh, we would have to cut services to the elderly and for the poor...", or, "school funding will be disrupted"...to which I say, not if the CORPORATIONS do their bloody job!

The so-called "income tax" that you and I have been paying was not our burden...this tax was rightfully the burden of corporations.

But in 1913, something wicked occurred...in 1913, treasonous legislators went behind the backs of Americans for their thirty pieces of silver, and passed the Federal Reserve Act, the treasonous 16th Amendment, and Woodrow Wilson gave corporations the rights of a "person".

The Federal Reserve Act was the third iteration of a central banking system; the first two were run out of town by Americans - from 1787 to 1913, the United States of America knew unbounded prosperity.

That all changed with the advent of the Federal Reserve.

In 1934, Major Smedley Darlington Butler caught wind of a plan to take over the United States; he turned on those treasonous scumbags and saved America.

Do we not make patriots of that stripe anymore?

The 16th Amendment did NOT provide for any new laws of taxation to the government...so, if the government was NOT able to tax individuals before 1913, why were they then able to tax individuals AFTER 1913?

One word - COLLUSION.

The bankers colluded with the corporate heads and lawyers to remove the tax burden from their shoulders, and then to place that burden upon WE THE PEOPLE.

One thing that would have forestalled this was the Original 13th Amendment, also referred to as the Titles Of Nobility Amendment.

The gist of this amendment is that no one with loyalties other than to the United States of America would be allowed to take employment within the United States Government.

Pretty sound idea, yes?

Obviously, the scumbags who wished to ruin our way of life didn't think so...and so the 13th Amendment was replaced in 1860...though there are researches that state that the original 13th Amendment was ratified, and this would therefore nullify the current 13th Amendment, which, if you read carefully, relegates WE THE PEOPLE to being SERVANTS of our elected officials.

If you don't believe this information, ask yourselves:

Why do our elected officials have FULL HEALTH CARE?

Why are practically all of our elected officials MILLIONAIRES?

Why would one need to contact their elected officials to notify them of the job they were elected to perform? When you shook their hands on the street as they pandered for your vote, you expressed your desires to them...did they WRITE THEM DOWN? Why would you believe that after speaking to hundreds of people a day, that they will remember ANYTHING you said? Hand them a note, or a flyer, make sure that they put it in their coat, or their briefcase, and ask that those issues be addressed...or they can look forward to your vote going to their opponents next election cycle.

There are many more questions that one can come upon, but the point here is...THEY LIVE...WE SLEEP.

They SPEND...We TOIL.

I was listening to Earl Caldwell on Friday's Caldwell Chronicle - he had a number of guest speakers on the show, and one of the topics discussed was that of the financial status of Americans. According to the information presented, the average American's standard of living stagnated at 1970, then began to reverse. Employers were able to get more out of employees, without having to increase compensation.

Of course...this does not account for outrageous golden parachutes offered to corporate heads...wouldn't you love a gig that provided you thirteen billion dollars after three weeks?

Yes...it's true
.

I can go on all day...but you get the point. Once this is realized, some action can be taken; until then - ALL YOUR BASE ARE BELONG TO THEM.

Wednesday, September 24, 2008

John McCain Kicks Librarian Out of Town Hall Event

All is not well in the McCain campaign, methinks:



By the way, did you know that Rick Davis was on the payroll of Freddie Mac at the tune of $15,000 a month?

That's some good payola...but what did it buy? It bought them lessened restrictions on trading...in other words...they did NOT have to be responsible with their financial transactions.

Because of the non-existent oversight placed on these institutions, we are in the state of looming recession/depression.

The Keating Five scandal was mentioned on FOX News...albeit briefly (kudos to Michael Rivero).

In other news, Michael Moore has released Slacker Uprising as a free download; in fact, he encourages everyone to make copies and distribute!

This is a couple days old...but still funny and sad: GOP delegate's hotel tryst goes bad when he wakes up with $120,000 missing
By David Hanners
dhanners@pioneerpress.com
Article Last Updated: 09/17/2008 08:32:27 AM CDT

He met her in the bar of the swank hotel and invited her to his room. Once there, the woman fixed the drinks and told him to get undressed.

And that, the delegate to the Republican National Convention told police, was the last thing he remembered.

When he awoke, the woman was gone, as was more than $120,000 in money, jewelry and other belongings.

The thief's take stunned cops.

"It's very, very, very rare," Minneapolis Police Sgt. William Palmer said. "I can think of a couple of burglaries where we had that much stolen, but it's the first time I've heard of this kind of deal."

In a statement released today, Gabriel Nathan Schwartz, 29, of Denver, put the figure at much less.

"It's embarrassing to admit that I was a target of a crime. I was drugged and had about $50,000 of personal items stolen, not the inflated number that the media is reporting from an inaccurate police report," he said.

"As a single man, I was flattered by the attention of a beautiful woman who introduced herself to me. I used poor judgment."

Contacted by the Denver Post Monday, Schwartz declined to speak on the record. In the statement released today, Schwartz said he would decline further interview requests.

The haul included a $30,000 watch, a $20,000 ring, a necklace valued at $5,000, earrings priced at $4,000 and a Prada belt valued at $1,000, police said.

Schwartz is a single attorney and a fixture in Colorado Republican politics. He
Advertisement
was one of the state's delegates to the convention this month in St. Paul.

Reached by phone at his law office Monday, Schwartz said that because the case still was under investigation, "I think at this point, I don't want to make a comment on it."

During the convention, Schwarz wasn't shy about talking to the media. In an Associated Press article about Sen. John McCain's acceptance speech, Schwartz was quoted as saying that as far as oratorical skills go, McCain "has more experience in his little pinkie" than Democratic nominee Barack Obama.

In an interview filmed the afternoon of Sept. 3 and posted on the Web site LinkTV.org, Schwartz was candid about how he envisioned change under a McCain presidency.

"Less taxes and more war," he said, smiling. He said the U.S. should "bomb the hell" out of Iran because the country threatens Israel.

Asked by the interviewer how America would pay for a military confrontation with Iran, he said the U.S. should take the country's resources.

"We should plant a flag. Take the oil, take the money," he said. "We deserve reimbursement."

A few hours after the interview, an unknown woman helped herself to Schwartz's resources.

The theft happened at the Hotel Ivy, a luxury hotel in downtown Minneapolis. (The Colorado delegation was housed at the Four Points Sheraton, several miles away on Industrial Boulevard Northeast.)

The theft occurred early on Sept. 4, hours after Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin gave her speech accepting her party's vice presidential nomination. A police report said Schwartz told officers he met a woman at the bar and took her to his $319-a-night room.

"Victim reported suspect made victim drinks, told him to get undressed, which is the last thing he remembers," a police narrative said. "Upon waking, victim discovered money, jewelry gone; total loss over $120K."

A police report notes the crime occurred between 4:22 and 5:46 a.m., and Palmer said investigators believe Schwartz was drugged, although he declined to discuss details.

Aside from the watch, ring, necklace, earrings and belt, Schwartz also reported a $1,000 purse or wallet, a $1,500 cell phone, $500 in cash and a couple of rings worth $50 had been taken.

Alister Glen, general manager of the Hotel Ivy, called the theft an isolated incident and said no hotel personnel were involved.

"I don't know if I'm at liberty to discuss it," he said. "It's still under police investigation."

Schwartz was a supporter of former New York City Mayor Rudy Giuliani, donating $2,300 — the maximum individual donation allowed by law — to his presidential campaign last year, according to records from the Federal Election Commission.

After Giuliani dropped out, Schwartz switched his allegiance to McCain, and records show he donated $2,300 to the Arizona senator's campaign in April.

In biographical sketches of Colorado's delegates published in the Rocky Mountain News, Schwartz said he was single, didn't have any pets and most admired Colorado Secretary of State Mike Coffman, "as he has served our party for many years and has served in the military."

He said his idea of a "dream ticket" was McCain and Mitt Romney, the former Massachusetts governor.

On the Web site for his Denver law practice, Sandomire & Schwartz, the lawyer describes his experience as a civil and criminal lawyer and points out he is a regular guest on "Colorado State of Mind," a public affairs program produced by Rocky Mountain PBS. The show, according to its Web site, says it gathers "opinionated and passionate people from across the state" to discuss a wide range of issues.

In his interview on LinkTV, Schwartz seemed opinionated and passionate.

He said an attack on Iran was needed to protect Israel, and he offered how it could be accomplished through "strategical airstrikes."

"Hopefully, just bomb the hell out of them from the sky. No troops," he said.

Schwartz was asked if he had a message to the protesters who filled the streets of downtown St. Paul.

"Get a job," he replied.

David Hanners can be reached at 612-338-6516.

--

Three words...what a TOOL.