The Magic Pristine Bullet…is neither!

Entries from March 2009

THE NEW WORLD ORDER… IS NEITHER!

March 27, 2009 · 2 Comments

Taken from Internet 3/26/2009 from: http://www.haaretz.com/hasen/spages/1074110.html

Will U.S. financial woes lead to new world order?

If there must be trouble, let it be in my day - so that my children may have peace.
If there must be trouble, let it be in my day – so that my children may have peace.

-Thomas Paine

 

 

 

 

 

By Adam Abrams

Is the U.S. about to lose its status as the dominant global superpower? Will the dollar collapse? If so, what would become the new global reserve currency and what would replace U.S. hegemony in a new world order?

American troops are currently stationed in over 150 countries around the world and have been actively engaged in combat since the beginning of the war in Afghanistan in 2001. The pretext for the invasion of Afghanistan was provided by the 9/11 attacks.

A second front in the U.S. “war on terror” was opened in 2003 with the invasion of Iraq. As well these military expenditures, the U.S. has an outstanding national debt of $10.8 trillion and rising.

Although U.S. President Barack Obama has outlined a timetable for complete U.S. troop withdrawal from Iraq by 2011, he has ordered an increase of 17,000 more U.S. troops in Afghanistan. With no clear end in sight to U.S. military engagement and with the U.S. national debt growing at an accelerating rate, it seems reasonable to ask whether or not the U.S. might be irreversibly overextending itself.

What does “new world order” mean? There are two distinct variations. Both expressions – a new period of history evidencing a dramatic change in world political thought and the balance of power and the advent of a cryptocratic or totalitarian world government – have relevance.

The global geopolitical climate is changing rapidly and appears to be on the verge of a realignment. This has become more apparent since the start of the world financial crisis, which finds its roots in the U.S. economic downturn.

So how would a new world order emerge? It seems that the global population would only be willing to accept the implementation of a new world order, in either form, in the event of a major global crisis, such as the complete economic collapse of the United States of America.

The U.S. is at the heart of the global economy because the U.S. dollar is currently the reserve currency of the world. Oil, gold and all major commodities are measured in U.S. dollars. If the U.S. were to collapse in the same way that Iceland and Latvia already have, the whole world would be affected. A new world order would need to be formed that no longer relied on U.S. global hegemony.

Many experts believe that this is not only possible, but likely. According to Professor Willem Buiter, a former member of the Monetary Policy Committee who is now at the London School of Economics, “There will, before long … be a global dumping of U.S. dollar assets, including U.S. government assets… The past eight years of imperial overstretch, hubris and domestic and international abuse of power on the part of the Bush administration has left the U.S. materially weakened financially, economically, politically and morally.”

Other economic gurus agree. Peter Schiff, an American economic commentator and president of the stock brokerage firm Euro Pacific Capital Inc. was mocked by economist Art Laffer, when he accurately predicted, in 2006, that the U.S. housing market “bubble” would burst. Schiff now predicts that gold will climb to $2,000 per ounce in response to the U.S. dollar dropping “like a stone” and losing its status as the global reserve currency.

Schiff was also an economic adviser to Ron Paul during his 2008 presidential campaign. Paul has been articulating similar concerns regarding the U.S. financial system for over 30 years, and advocates the legitimization of gold and silver as currency, as well as the elimination of the U.S. Federal Reserve System. This he says, “will allow Congress to reassert its constitutional authority over monetary policy.”

Paul sees the Federal Reserve as the main culprit in perpetuating and exacerbating the current U.S. financial crisis: “Americans have suffered a steadily eroding purchasing power because of the Federal Reserve’s inflationary policies. This represents a real, if hidden, tax imposed on the American people.” He has repeatedly introduced a bill to the U.S. Congress that would allow for the auditing of the Federal Reserve Board and provide transparency into its dealings, to no avail.

Meanwhile, the man who accurately predicted the stock market crash of 1987 and the collapse of the Soviet Union has an intriguing prediction that goes even further. Gerald Celente, the CEO of Trends Research Institute, has forecast that by 2012 there will be a revolution in the U.S., accompanied by food riots and tax rebellions.

So, with this in mind, who or what could replace the United States as the world’s dominant player?

One possibility is that the United Nations will take on the role of a global government. This theory seems to be supported in a speech by then-president George H. W. Bush before Congress on March 6, 1991, following the expulsion of Iraqi forces from Kuwait.

“…We can see a new world coming into view,” said Bush. “A world in which there is the very real prospect of a new world order. In the words of Winston Churchill, a ‘world order’ in which ‘the principles of justice and fair play … protect the weak against the strong …’ A world where the United Nations, freed from cold war stalemate, is poised to fulfill the historic vision of its founders. A world in which freedom and respect for human rights find a home among all nations.”

Until recently, the advent of a global government seemed unrealistic, and reserved for conspiracy theorists. But since the acknowledgement by then-president George W. Bush in September 2008 that the United States is indeed “in the midst of a serious financial crisis”, there have been numerous calls for a “new world order” by global leaders and prominent intellectuals.

In January, Henry Kissinger told CNBC reporters that the current world economic crisis is a “great opportunity” for President Barack Obama to help form a “new world order.”
British Prime Minister Gordon Brown actually began the call for a new world order before the acknowledgement of the current financial downturn.

Speaking in June 2007, Brown said: “I believe it will be said of this age, the first decades of the 21st century, that out of the greatest restructuring of the global economy, perhaps even greater than the industrial revolution, a new world order was created.”

The British leader has continued to press for a new world order since that speech. Even a few weeks ago he declared the need for a “global new deal.”

“Britain and America may be separated by the thousands of miles of the Atlantic, but we are united by shared values that can never be broken. And as America stands at its own dawn of hope, I want that hope to be fulfilled through us all coming together to shape the 21st century as the first century of a truly global society.”

Could this “truly global society” be the same society that Bush Sr. spoke of, with the UN fulfilling “the historic vision of its founders”?

It is certainly possible, but would be rather difficult to implement. The government of every nation in the world would either have to willingly surrender sovereignty to the United Nations or be forced into doing so by the use of military force. Both options are utterly improbable -unless an unpheaval on a massive scale resulted in a new-found willingness by the big players in the global arena to submit to an international body.

The only such event that seems even remotely likely is the end of Western global dominance and the transfer of global hegemony to the Eurasian powers. Perhaps it would not be a “global government”, but a “new world order”, with the central power of the world residing in Asia.

This seems to be the most realistic scenario, particularly as China is the largest creditor to the U.S. If the Chinese government decided to dump all of its U.S. dollars, the entire U.S. economy would collapse overnight.

But would China do that? The motivation would be two-fold; firstly, the U.S. Federal Reserve’s “inflationary policies” (as described by Ron Paul) devalue the U.S. currency to the point that China no longer has an incentive to hold U.S. dollars, and secondly, China sees an opportunity to become the dominant player in the new world order.

Perhaps this is the scenario that Buiter envisions when he describes a “global dumping of U.S. dollar assets.” If the Chinese government were to abandon the U.S. dollar it would certainly trigger such a “dumping” of U.S. assets.

In fact, just last week China’s premier hinted that Beijing is concerned about its creditor-debtor relationship with the U.S.:

“We have lent a huge amount of money to the United States. I request the U.S. to maintain its good credit, to honor its promises and to guarantee the safety of China’s assets.”

In addition, the Kremlin last week called for the creation of a “supranational reserve currency” to be on the agenda at the upcoming G20 meeting in London. Zhou Xiaochuan, the governor of China’s central bank, has expressed a similar desire for a new global reserve currency “that is disconnected from individual nations and is able to remain stable in the long run, thus removing the inherent deficiencies caused by using credit-based national currencies.”

China and Russia have both experienced severe economic downturns since September 2008, but both blame the U.S. for initiating the global crisis.

If such a currency were to be formed, one that was “disconnected from individual nations,” it is possible that some form of global bank would be the creditor. According to Zhou Xiaochuan, the International Monetary Fund is one potential candidate for this role. The U.S. president, meanwhile, has said that he does not support a global currency.

Looking at history, there is only one circumstance under which a very large and diverse population would be willing to accept such a massive override and restructuring of the global order. That circumstance is chaos.

The collapse of the United States of America would certainly create the chaos necessary to justify the formation of a new global reserve currency and ultimately a new world order, with its central power residing in Eurasia.

Editor’s Comment:

By Jack Mosel

First of all, who said “WE” are interested in a NEW WORLD ORDER?! I never received a ballot, proposal or other political mechanism to ask me whether or not I wanted to be a member of a universally global uni-country which has no constitution and no civil rights and no currency based on its country’s work ethic and civic pride. I never was asked about how I felt about SCREWING our FORFATHERS and ourFATHERS and our GRANDFATHERS! Our FATHERS and GRANDFATHERS spilled their blood as American Patriots on Foreign soil and in our time, not some time distant and not connected to today’s U.S.A. Our FATHERS AND Grandfathers gave all to keep our Beautiful FREE NATION ALIVE AND STANDING just as our FOUNDING FATHERS INTENDED GOD DAMMIT!

WE’LL PAY CHINA BACK EVERY RED CENT THEY LENT US… AND THEY CAN GO BACK TO HELL, WHERE THEY WERE HIDDING ALL ALONG…AFTER THAT…

AMERICA IS NOT FOR SALE! DO YOU HEAR THAT LOBBYISTS, MCSAME, HALLIBURTONS, BUSH/CHENEY CARLYLE GROUPIES, BILDERBERGER CRONIES AND BOHEMIAN GROVE PERVERTS!

YOU THINK YOU SOLD HER OUT FROM UNDER US.. BUT YOU NEVER ASKED US, INCLUDED US OR EVEN WERE REMOTELY TRUTHFUL WITH US. YOU HAVE INVOLVED US IN YOUR SICK CON GAME AND PERVERTED FOLLY OF EVIL…

WE WON’T LET HER GO AND WE’LL SELL YOU OUT WAY BEFORE WE SURRENDER HER FOR MORE ILL GOTTEN POWER AND ROTTEN HOLLOW PROFITS FOR YOUR ENTITLED BONEY FASCIST NAZI CORPORATE EVIL ASSES!

GEORGE BUSH, DICK CHENEY, BUSH SENIOR, KARL ROVE, ALL NEED TO PAY THE PIPER… MCSHAME AND PHIL GRAMM TOO! MANY MORE NEED TO BE AIRED OUT AS WELL…

* GENERALS… STAND READY TO OBEY YOUR OATH PERSONAL TO YOUR SOULS’, TO COMMIT YOUR ENTIRE SELF TO YOUR/OUR BEAUTIFUL HOME… ENEMIES FROM WITHIN ARE ONSHORE AND IN TACTICAL MODE TO TAKE US OUT!!! OUR CONSTITUTION IS UNDER SEIGE AND REAL PATRIOTS FROM OUR NATION’S PAST AND PRESENT WILL COUNT ON YOUR DECISIONS TO SERVE THE NATION YOU SWORE TO DEFEND FROM THESE CRIMINALS.

DAMN THEM STRAIGHT TO HELL SIRS AND MADAMES IF THEY TRY TO DISRESPECT HER !!!

THESE BUMS KILLED OUR COUNTRYNWO MY ASS… !!!

* 9/11  FRAUD — INSIDE JOB — FREE FALL SPEED, THREE BUILDINGS?!!! WHERE’S OSAMA?! , FABRICATE INTELLIGENCE, OUT A CIA OPERATIVE FROM THE OVAL OFFICE, FIRST STRIKE / WAR ON IRAQ WITH NO MANDATE — NO WMD’S

* ENRON — BUSH PRIMER – BUSH AND CHENEY’S FIRST INSULT OFFERED TO US AS BUSH’S FIRST ORDER OF BUSINESS AS FASCIST NAZI.

* 2000 / 2004 ELECTION FRAUD — SKULL & BONES TRUMPS OUR NATION AND TAKES FULL CONTROL OF CONSTITUTION

* OKLAHOMA CITY — FRAUD — MULTIPLE BOMBS (FOUND INSIDE THE BUILDING!)

* DESERT STORM — FARCE — CON JOB

* S & L “CRISIS” — BUSH SENIOR’s FIRST ATTEMPT WITH MCSHAME AND KEATING 5 TO BRING IN THE MOB IN DERREGULATING THE BANKS — THEY EVENTUALLY GOT “BETTER” AT IT.

* IRAN CONTRA — OLLIE NORTH — PLEADS FIFTH — CAUGHT OCTOBER SURPRISE — RED HANDED — IRANGATE

* VIETNAM — OPERATION NORTH WOODS – FALSE FLAG -ADMITTED BY MACNAMARA– FARCE — CON   JOB

* ASSASINATION OF PRES. JOHN F. KENNEDY — BUSH  HENCHMEN — CIA — HIT TEAM — NIXON — ONASSIS

* BAY OF PIGS / CUBA — SET UP — CON JOB — CIA– BUSH & BIN LADEN’s FIRST BUSINESS VENTURE!!! SEPATA OIL CO. DRUG $ CIA WEAPONS CASH

* KOREA — FARCE — CON JOB

* WWII – FORD MOTOR CO., ROCKEFELLER, U.S. OIL, GOOD YEAR, ET, al. MADE HITLER , NAZI GERMANYand brought his evil regime back here. GEORGE BUSH SR. MAY VERY WELL ACTUALLY BE THE SON OF HITLER’S BODYGUARD WHO WAS BROUGHT HERE AFTER WWII IDENTITY SCAM, ACTUAL BIRTH OF CIA . NICOLI TESLA MAKES REFERENCE TO BUSH AS CURIOUS GEORGE (SCHERF) GOOGLE GEORGE SCHERF ! HE WATCHED OVER TESLA AND THEY SHUT THAT BOY DOWN LOCKED TIGHT, BECAUSE HE WAS WHO HE SAID HE WAS!!! A GENIUS AND COULD PROVIDE FREE ENERGY AND WIRELESS TRANSMISSION OF IT! J.P. MORGAN CAUSED US TO SUFFER THESE ARCHAIC METHODS OF WHAT WE KNOW OF AS FOSSIL FUEL POWER GENERATION. BECAUSE HE COULDN’T CHARGE FOR ELECTRICAL POWER FROM TESLA’S FREE TRANSMISSION DEVICE.

*  PEARL HARBOR WAS A SCAM… JUST LIKE 9/11, WE LET THOSE JAPANESE PLANES GET THROUGH. WAR HAS BEEN PROFITTABLE (TO THE FEW THAT OWN THE WEAPONS MFG. AND THE OTHERS WHO MANUFACTER THE GOODS FOR WAR, AS WELL AS THE PEOPLE WHO FUND IT… ROCKEFELLER) RIGHT BUSH SENIOR… HOW’S THE CARLYLE GROUP TREATING YA AFTER GOING PUBLIC ON 9/11/2001

 *  CONSPIRACY THEORIES… WHO STANDS TO LOSE FROM INVESTIGATING THEM NOW!!!

*** SEEN OSAMA.. OBAMA!

Categories: ALL OF THE ABOVE! · AM-BUSHED! · HERO'S & ZERO'S · INSIDE JOB · JON STEWART HERO! · KARL ROVE · LIES · PLASTIC SANDWICH · PROPOGANDA · SHAMWOW! · TAKIN' THE 5TH! · TRUTH · WHERE'S OSAMA!
Tagged: , , , , , , ,

JFK’s executive order #11110 More FACTS FROM REVISION…

March 26, 2009 · 1 Comment

Taken from Internet 1/03/2009 from: http://www.john-f-kennedy.net/executiveorder11110.htm

President John F.Kennedy, The Federal Reserve and Executive Order 11110

rememberingjack144

by Cedric X

We cannot forget what we never knew…President Kennedy… We hardly knew ya.

From: The Final Call,

Vol. 15, No.6, On January 17, 1996

On June 4, 1963, a little known attempt was made to strip the Federal Reserve Bank of its power to loan money to the government at interest. On that day President John F. Kennedy signed Executive Order No. 11110 that returned to the U.S. government the power to issue currency, without going through the Federal Reserve. Mr. Kennedy’s order gave the Treasury the power “to issue silver certificates against any silver bullion, silver, or standard silver dollars in the Treasury.” This meant that for every ounce of silver in the U.S. Treasury’s vault, the government could introduce new money into circulation. In all, Kennedy brought nearly $4.3 billion in U.S. notes into circulation. The ramifications of this bill are enormous.

With the stroke of a pen, Mr. Kennedy was on his way to putting the Federal Reserve Bank of New York out of business. If enough of these silver certificats were to come into circulation they would have eliminated the demand for Federal Reserve notes. This is because the silver certificates are backed by silver and the Federal Reserve notes are not backed by anything. Executive Order 11110 could have prevented the national debt from reaching its current level, because it would have given the gevernment the ability to repay its debt without going to the Federal Reserve and being charged interest in order to create the new money. Executive Order 11110 gave the U.S. the ability to create its own money backed by silver.

After Mr. Kennedy was assassinated just five months later, no more silver certificates were issued. The Final Call has learned that the Executive Order was never repealed by any U.S. President through an Executive Order and is still valid. Why then has no president utilized it? Virtually all of the nearly $6 trillion in debt has been created since 1963, and if a U.S. president had utilized Executive Order 11110 the debt would be nowhere near the current level. Perhaps the assassination of JFK was a warning to future presidents who would think to eliminate the U.S. debt by eliminating the Federal Reserve’s control over the creation of money. Mr. Kennedy challenged the government of money by challenging the two most successful vehicles that have ever been used to drive up debt – war and the creation of money by a privately-owned central bank. His efforts to have all troops out of Vietnam by 1965 and Executive Order 11110 would have severely cut into the profits and control of the New York banking establishment. As America’s debt reaches unbearable levels and a conflict emerges in Bosnia that will further increase America’s debt, one is force to ask, will President Clinton have the courage to consider utilizing Executive Order 11110 and, ifso, is he willing to pay the ultimate price for doing so?

Executive Order 11110 AMENDMENT OF EXECUTIVE ORDER NO. 10289

AS AMENDED, RELATING TO THE PERFORMANCE OF CERTAIN FUNCTIONS AFFECTING THE DEPARTMENT OF THE TREASURY

By virtue of the authority vested in me by section 301 of title 3 of the United States Code, it is ordered as follows:

Section 1. Executive Order No. 10289 of September 19, 1951, as amended, is hereby further amended-

By adding at the end of paragraph 1 thereof the following subparagraph (j):

(j) The authority vested in the President by paragraph (b) of section 43 of the Act of May 12,1933, as amended (31 U.S.C.821(b)), to issue silver certificates against any silver bullion, silver, or standard silver dollars in the Treasury not then held for redemption of any outstanding silver certificates, to prescribe the denomination of such silver certificates, and to coin standard silver dollars and subsidiary silver currency for their redemption

and –

Byrevoking subparagraphs (b) and (c) of paragraph 2 thereof.

Sec. 2. The amendments made by this Order shall not affect any act done, or any right accruing or accrued or any suit or proceeding had or commenced in any civil or criminal cause prior to the date of this Order but all such liabilities shall continue and may be enforced as if said amendments had not been made.

John F. Kennedy The White House, June 4, 1963.

Of course, the fact that both JFK and Lincoln met the the same end is a mere coincidence.

Abraham Lincoln’s Monetary Policy, 1865 (Page 91 of Senate document 23.)

Money is the creature of law and the creation of the original issue of money should be maintained as the exclusive monopoly of national Government.

Money possesses no value to the State other than that given to it by circulation.

Capital has its proper place and is entitled to every protection. The wages of men should be recognised in the structure of and in the social order as more important than the wages of money.

No duty is more imperative for the Government than the duty it owes the People to furnish them with a sound and uniform currency, and of regulating the circulation of the medium of exchange so that labour will be protected from a vicious currency, and commerce will be facilitated by cheap and safe exchanges.

The available supply of Gold and Silver being wholly inadequate to permit the issuance of coins of intrinsic value or paper currency convertible into coin in the volume required to serve the needs of the People, some other basis for the issue of currency must be developed, and some means other than that of convertibility into coin must be developed to prevent undue fluctuation in the value of paper currency or any other substitute for money of intrinsic value that may come into use.

The monetary needs of increasing numbers of People advancing towards higher standards of living can and should be met by the Government. Such needs can be served by the issue of National Currency and Credit through the operation of a National Banking system .The circulation of a medium of exchange issued and backed by the Government can be properly regulated and redundancy of issue avoided by withdrawing from circulation such amounts as may be necessary by Taxation, Redeposit, and otherwise. Government has the power to regulate the currency and creditof the Nation.

Government should stand behind its currency and credit and the Bank deposits of the Nation. No individual should suffer a loss of money through depreciation or inflated currency or Bank bankruptcy.

Government possessing the power to create and issue currency and creditas money and enjoying the right to withdraw both currency and credit from circulation by Taxation and otherwise need not and should not borrow capital at interest as a means of financing Governmental work and public enterprise. The Government should create, issue, and circulate all the currency and credit needed to satisfy the spending power of the Government and the buying power of the consumers. The privilege of creating and issueing money is not only the supreme prerogative of Government, but it is the Governments greatest creative opportunity.

By the adoption of these principles the long felt want for a uniform medium will be satisfied. The taxpayers will be saved immense sums of interest, discounts, and exchanges. The financing of all public enterprise, the maintenance of stable Government and ordered progress, and the conduct of the Treasury will become matters of practical administration. The people can and will be furnished with a currency as safe as their own Government. Money will cease to be master and become the servant of humanity. Democracy will rise superior to the money power.

Some information on the Federal Reserve The Federal Reserve, a Private Corporation One of the most common concerns among people who engage in any effort to reduce their taxes is, “Will keeping my money hurt the government’s ability to pay it’s bills?” As explained in the first article in this series, the modern withholding tax does not, and wasn’t designed to, pay for government services. What it does do, is pay for the privately-owned Federal Reserve System.

Black’s Law Dictionary defines the “Federal Reserve System” as, “Network of twelve central banks to which most national banks belong and to which state chartered banks may belong. Membership rules require investment of stock and minimum reserves.”

Privately-owned banks own the stock of the Fed. This was explained in more detail in the case of Lewis v. United States, Federal Reporter, 2nd Series, Vol. 680, Pages 1239, 1241 (1982), where the court said:

Each Federal Reserve Bank is a separate corporation owned by commercial banks in its region. The stock-holding commercial banks elect two thirds of each Bank’s nine member board of directors.

Similarly, the Federal Reserve Banks, though heavily regulated, are locally controlled by their member banks. Taking another look at Black’s Law Dictionary, we find that these privately owned banks actually issue money:

Federal Reserve Act. Law which created Federal Reserve banks which act as agents in maintaining money reserves, issuing money in the form of bank notes, lending money to banks, and supervising banks. Administered by Federal Reserve Board (q.v.).

The FED banks, which are privately owned, actually issue, that is, create, the money we use. In 1964 the House Committee on Banking and Currency, Subcommittee on Domestic Finance, at the second session of the 88th Congress, put out a study entitled Money Facts which contains a good description of what the FED is:

The Federal Reserve is a total money-making machine.It can issue money or checks. And it never has a problem of making its checks good because it can obtain the $5 and $10 bills necessary to cover its check simply by asking the Treasury Department’s Bureau of Engraving to print them.

As we all know, anyone who has a lot of money has a lot of power. Now imagine a group of people who have the power to create money. Imagine the power these people would have. This is what the Fed is.

No man did more to expose the power of the Fed than Louis T. McFadden, who was the Chairman of the House Banking Committee back in the 1930s. Constantly pointing out that monetary issues shouldn’t be partisan, he criticized both the Herbert Hoover and Franklin Roosevelt administrations. In describing the Fed, he remarked in the Congressional Record, House pages 1295 and 1296 on June 10, 1932, that:

Mr. Chairman,we have in this country one of the most corrupt institutions the world has ever known. I refer to the Federal Reserve Board and the Federal reserve banks. The Federal Reserve Board, a Government Board, has cheated the Government of the United States and he people of the United States out of enoughmoney to pay the national debt. The depredations and the iniquities of the Federal Reserve Board and the Federal reserve banks acting together have cost this country enough money to pay the national debt several times over. This evil institution has impoverished and ruined the people of the UnitedStates; has bankrupted itself, and has practically bankrupted our Government. It has done this through the maladministration of that law by which the Federal Reserve Board, and through the corrupt practices of the moneyed vultures who control it.

Some people think the Federal reserve banks are United States Government institutions. They are not Government institutions. They are private credit monopolies which prey upon the people of the United States for the benefit of themselves and their foreign customers; foreign and domestic speculators and swindlers; and rich and predatory money lenders. In that dark crew of financial pirates there are those who would cut a man’s throat to get a dollar out of his pocket; there are those who send money into States to buy votes to control our legislation; and there are those who maintain an international propaganda for the purpose of deceiving us and of wheedling us into the granting of new concessions which will permit them to cover up their past misdeeds and set again in motion their gigantic train of crime. Those 12 private credit monopolies were deceitfully and disloyally foisted upon this country by bankers who came here from Europe and who repaid us for our hospitality by undermining our American institutions.

The Fed basically works like this: The government granted its power to create money to the Fed banks. They create money, then loan it back to the government charging interest. The government levies income taxes to pay the interest on the debt. On this point, it’s interesting to note that the Federal Reserve act and the sixteenth amendment, which gave congress the power to collect income taxes, were both passed in 1913. The incredible power of the Fed over the economy is universally admitted. Some people, especially in the banking and academic communities, even support it. On the other hand, there are those, both in the past and in the present, that speak out against it. One of these men was President John F. Kennedy.

Kennedy’s efforts were detailed in Jim Marrs’ 1990 book, Crossfire:

Another overlooked aspect of Kennedy’s attempt to reform American society involves money. Kennedy apparently reasoned that by returning to the constitution, which states that only Congress shall coin and regulate money, the soaring national debt could be reduced by not paying interest to the bankers of the Federal Reserve System, who print paper money then loan it to the government at interest. He moved in this area on June 4, 1963, by signing Executive Order 11,110 which called for the issuance of $4,292,893,815 in United States Notes through the U.S. Treasury rather than the traditional Federal Reserve System. That same day, Kennedy signed a bill changing the backing of one and two dollar bills from silver to gold, adding strength to the weakened U.S. currency.

Kennedy’s comptroller of the currency, James J. Saxon, had been at odds with the powerful Federal Reserve Board for some time, encouraging broader investment and lending powers for banks that were not part of the Federal Reserve system. Saxon also had decided that non-Reserve banks could underwrite state and local general obligation bonds, again weakening the dominant Federal Reserve banks.

A number of “Kennedy bills” were indeed issued – the author has a five dollar bill in his possession with the heading “United States Note” – but were quickly withdrawn after Kennedy’s death. According to information from the Library of the Comptroller of the Currency, Executive Order 11,110 remains in effect today, although successive administrations beginning with that of President Lyndon Johnson apparently have simply ignored it and instead returned to the practice of paying interest on Federal Reserve notes. Today we continue to use Federal Reserve Notes, and the deficit is at an all-time high.

Editor’s Opinion:

With regard to our present economic crisis alone, Treachery and Treason take on a much more dire meaning and the consequences for our not paying close attention to our being warned, in terms of heeding our patriotic leader’s from the past such as JFK, that enemies from within are seeking to undermine our very way of life and are active in undermining our civl liberties as well as our monetary system. Not to mention our once democratic operation’s of government. It is with this in mind that beseech the politically active reading this blog, to carry the torch of reason and better judgement to those who may have contact with political representitives who may be in position to accomplish real change in our nation’s direction both politically and morally.

Information similar to the article posted above is shocking and leaves me wondering about why accountability and even objective / investigative reporting isn’t done anymore. In what is the most progressive and technically savvy time of mankind’s history… we are as in the dark as ever. We are as under-represented and hog-tied as ever in our history and we are effectively at the mercy of an oligarchy, which has blatently lied and outwardly refuses to cooperate with our rules of law. Isn’t this the kind of thing Ron Paul was talking about? have we reduced ourselves to being so terrified… that we don’t bare to look at our dirty laundry or talk to bother anymore to confront what is looking like really bad leadership and dare I say treason or treachery? When was the last time you heard anyone convicted of treason or treachery?… No now it’s gonna be prosecutions of U.S. Citizens who are acting out (badly) in un-patriotic manners who will be thrown in jail for speaking their minds… Tick Tick Tick… Constitution’s burning folks… Got audacity (For Real).

Mr. Obama, will your administration deny these realities? Mr. Kennedy, or Ms. Kennedy, will you pick up the torch?

11/23/1963 R.I.P. Let’s Roll!

Categories: ALL OF THE ABOVE! · AM-BUSHED! · HERO'S & ZERO'S · INSIDE JOB · JON STEWART HERO! · KARL ROVE · LIES · PLASTIC SANDWICH · PROPOGANDA · SHAMWOW! · TAKIN' THE 5TH! · TRUTH · WHERE'S OSAMA!
Tagged: , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

Revisionism:CONGRESS PASSES WIDE-RANGING BILL EASING BANK LAWS

March 26, 2009 · 2 Comments

The Past … is our greatest asset.

bush__shoe1

 

CONGRESS PASSES WIDE-RANGING BILL EASING BANK LAWS
By STEPHEN LABATON
Published: Friday, November 5, 1999

Congress approved landmark legislation today that opens the door for a new era on Wall Street in which commercial banks, securities houses and insurers will find it easier and cheaper to enter one another’s businesses.
The measure, considered by many the most important banking legislation in 66 years, was approved in the Senate by a vote of 90 to 8 and in the House tonight by 362 to 57. The bill will now be sent to the president, who is expected to sign it, aides said. It would become one of the most significant achievements this year by the White House and the Republicans leading the 106th Congress.
”Today Congress voted to update the rules that have governed financial services since the Great Depression and replace them with a system for the 21st century,” Treasury Secretary Lawrence H. Summers said. ”This historic legislation will better enable American companies to compete in the new economy.”
The decision to repeal the Glass-Steagall Act of 1933 provoked dire warnings from a handful of dissenters that the deregulation of Wall Street would someday wreak havoc on the nation’s financial system. The original idea behind Glass-Steagall was that separation between bankers and brokers would reduce the potential conflicts of interest that were thought to have contributed to the speculative stock frenzy before the Depression.
Today’s action followed a rich Congressional debate about the history of finance in America in this century, the causes of the banking crisis of the 1930’s, the globalization of banking and the future of the nation’s economy.
Administration officials and many Republicans and Democrats said the measure would save consumers billions of dollars and was necessary to keep up with trends in both domestic and international banking. Some institutions, like Citigroup, already have banking, insurance and securities arms but could have been forced to divest their insurance underwriting under existing law. Many foreign banks already enjoy the ability to enter the securities and insurance industries.
”The world changes, and we have to change with it,” said Senator Phil Gramm of Texas, who wrote the law that will bear his name along with the two other main Republican sponsors, Representative Jim Leach of Iowa and Representative Thomas J. Bliley Jr. of Virginia. ”We have a new century coming, and we have an opportunity to dominate that century the same way we dominated this century. Glass-Steagall, in the midst of the Great Depression, came at a time when the thinking was that the government was the answer. In this era of economic prosperity, we have decided that freedom is the answer.”
In the House debate, Mr. Leach said, ”This is a historic day. The landscape for delivery of financial services will now surely shift.”
But consumer groups and civil rights advocates criticized the legislation for being a sop to the nation’s biggest financial institutions. They say that it fails to protect the privacy interests of consumers and community lending standards for the disadvantaged and that it will create more problems than it solves.
The opponents of the measure gloomily predicted that by unshackling banks and enabling them to move more freely into new kinds of financial activities, the new law could lead to an economic crisis down the road when the marketplace is no longer growing briskly.
”I think we will look back in 10 years’ time and say we should not have done this but we did because we forgot the lessons of the past, and that that which is true in the 1930’s is true in 2010,” said Senator Byron L. Dorgan, Democrat of North Dakota. ”I wasn’t around during the 1930’s or the debate over Glass-Steagall. But I was here in the early 1980’s when it was decided to allow the expansion of savings and loans. We have now decided in the name of modernization to forget the lessons of the past, of safety and of soundness.”
Senator Paul Wellstone, Democrat of Minnesota, said that Congress had ‘’seemed determined to unlearn the lessons from our past mistakes.”
”Scores of banks failed in the Great Depression as a result of unsound banking practices, and their failure only deepened the crisis,” Mr. Wellstone said. ”Glass-Steagall was intended to protect our financial system by insulating commercial banking from other forms of risk. It was one of several stabilizers designed to keep a similar tragedy from recurring. Now Congress is about to repeal that economic stabilizer without putting any comparable safeguard in its place.”
Supporters of the legislation rejected those arguments. They responded that historians and economists have concluded that the Glass-Steagall Act was not the correct response to the banking crisis because it was the failure of the Federal Reserve in carrying out monetary policy, not speculation in the stock market, that caused the collapse of 11,000 banks. If anything, the supporters said, the new law will give financial companies the ability to diversify and therefore reduce their risks. The new law, they said, will also give regulators new tools to supervise shaky institutions.
”The concerns that we will have a meltdown like 1929 are dramatically overblown,” said Senator Bob Kerrey, Democrat of Nebraska.
Others said the legislation was essential for the future leadership of the American banking system.
”If we don’t pass this bill, we could find London or Frankfurt or years down the road Shanghai becoming the financial capital of the world,” said Senator Charles E. Schumer, Democrat of New York. ”There are many reasons for this bill, but first and foremost is to ensure that U.S. financial firms remain competitive.”
But other lawmakers criticized the provisions of the legislation aimed at discouraging community groups from pressing banks to make more loans to the disadvantaged. Representative Maxine Waters, Democrat of California, said during the House debate that the legislation was ”mean-spirited in the way it had tried to undermine the Community Reinvestment Act.” And Representative Barney Frank, Democrat of Massachusetts, said it was ironic that while the legislation was deregulating financial services, it had begun a new system of onerous regulation on community advocates.
Many experts predict that, even though the legislation has been trailing market trends that have begun to see the cross-ownership of banks, securities firms and insurers, the new law is certain to lead to a wave of large financial mergers.
The White House has estimated the legislation could save consumers as much as $18 billion a year as new financial conglomerates gain economies of scale and cut costs.
Other experts have disputed those estimates as overly optimistic, and said that the bulk of any profits seen from the deregulation of financial services would be returned not to customers but to shareholders.
These are some of the key provisions of the legislation:
*Banks will be able to affiliate with insurance companies and securities concerns with far fewer restrictions than in the past.
*The legislation preserves the regulatory structure in Washington and gives the Federal Reserve and the Office of Comptroller of the Currency roles in regulating new financial conglomerates. The Securities and Exchange Commission will oversee securities operations at any bank, and the states will continue to regulate insurance.
*It will be more difficult for industrial companies to control a bank. The measure closes a loophole that had permitted a number of commercial enterprises to open savings associations known as unitary thrifts.
One Republican Senator, Richard C. Shelby of Alabama, voted against the legislation. He was joined by seven Democrats: Barbara Boxer of California, Richard H. Bryan of Nevada, Russell D. Feingold of Wisconsin, Tom Harkin of Iowa, Barbara A. Mikulski of Maryland, Mr. Dorgan and Mr. Wellstone.
In the House, 155 Democrats and 207 Republicans voted for the measure, while 51 Democrats, 5 Republicans and 1 independent opposed it. Fifteen members did not vote.
Tucked away in the legislation is a provision that some experts today warned could cost insurance policyholders as much as $50 billion. The provision would allow mutual insurance companies to move to other states to avoid payments they would otherwise owe policyholders as they reorganize their corporate structure. Many states, including New York and New Jersey, do not allow such relocations without the consent of the insurer’s domicile state. But the legislation before Congress would pre-empt the states.
Both the Metropolitan Life Insurance Company and the Prudential Life Insurance Company are in the midst of reorganizing into stock-based corporations that are requiring them to pay billions of dollars to policyholders from years of accumulated surplus. In exchange, the policyholders give up their ownership in the mutual insurance company.
The legislation would permit any mutual insurance company to avoid making surplus payments to policyholders by simply moving to states with more permissive laws and setting up a hybrid corporate structure known as a mutual holding company.
The provision was inserted by Representative Bliley at the urging of a trade association. It attracted little opposition because it was attached to a provision that forbids insurers from discriminating against domestic-violence victims.
In a letter sent to Congress this week, Mr. Summers said that the provision ”could allow insurance companies to avoid state law protecting policyholders, enriching insiders at the expense of consumers.”
A version of this article appeared in print on Friday, November 5, 1999, on section A page 1 of the New York edition.
Permalink article available here: http%3A%2F%2Fwww.nytimes.com%2F1999%2F11%2F05%2Fbusiness%2Fcongress-passes-wide-ranging-bill-easing-bank-laws.html Taken from internet 3/26/09

Editor’s comment:
By Jack Mosel

“Through the past darkly” a great Rolling Stones album’s title immediately came to mind when I read this.
“Supporters of the legislation rejected those arguments. They responded that historians and economists have concluded that the Glass-Steagall Act was not the correct response to the banking crisis because it was the failure of the Federal Reserve in carrying out monetary policy, not speculation in the stock market, which caused the collapse of 11,000 banks.”
Our Constitution states that the Federal Government is solely responsible for carrying out OUR monetary Policy. The Federal Reserve is not above the U.S. Constitution… It’s not even included in it.. It’s not even PERMICABLE… OR IS IT?! JFK found out ‘the hard way’ what happens when a sitting President tries to impose a asset based monetary system as opposed to a debtors society… THEY’VE COLLATORALIZED OUR LIVES, OUR FUTURE’S AND OUR FREEDOMS, for their PROFIT… ARE WE THERE YET?! IN TERMS OF BEING SICK OVER THESE CRIMES!
I believe if we are to investigate ANYTHING these days… It’s to hold a CONSTITUTIONAL hearing on the soundness and validity of political practices NOT BEING ADHERRED TO as a result of ILLEGAL “Laws” put into place by “ENEMY COMBATANTS FROM WITHIN!”…
TREASON & TREACHERY need to be front and center and HIGH CRIMES and MISDEMEANORS need to be PUT ON THE TABLE!
We knew that the same S&L crowd that brought us Financial Crisis in the 80’s and 90’s Phil Gramm, McCain, and the REAL ELITIST NOW, NEO-CON’s paraded around wrapped up in a flag and handed us a pile a mile high… They’re only interests were in satiating their crowd’s, political and personal friend’s best interests as well as in feathering their own nest.
All these articles of evidence can easily be found to air out these criminals… They leave trails like slugs from wherever they went and they are pointing to where they are going. It isn’t hard to see that our freedoms and our living quality is the only real hard currency being put up for collateral on these self indulgent, Criminal Elite’s playing us as bafoons and pitting us against each other with the façade of our believing that a two party system actually exists. As well and equally as funny, that there are laws in effect which answer to a higher authority once referred to as The U.S. Constitution.
I saw Good night and Good Luck Last night, the movie about television journalist Edward R. Murrow. Murrow lamented toward the end that it was the media that held the freedoms that we as American’s hold dearly and will value only through the open and honest ETHICAL reporting from T.V., Print and Radio journalists who report the news and bring to the foreground FACTS to us openly and honestly. It was U.S. Sen. Joseph McCarthy who spawned an era of fear and terrorist tactics which eerily resemble todays in so far as polarizing real American patriots and other anti-American’s who are un-patriotic. The measure of which, in determining who is and who isn’t a good American, in my belief is strictly in whether the opinions of those in question are informed or not on FACTS. The media is implicated here in the highest order. It is the media who has not come to the forefront in terms of risking ANYTHING in terms of offering investigative reporting and unearthing facts which would have not permitted let’s say at least the last 8 years of tyranny and fascism, real UN-AMERICAN activities and TREACHERY and TREASON by the BUSH/CHENEY’s Administration’s HIGH CRIMES AND MISDEMEANORS.
Why is this? SIMPLY it is because the OWNERS of the major media sources are conglomerates which are wholly owned and monopolized by WALL STREET CORPORATIONS. By definition WE HAVE FALLEN TO FASCISM in this way. The only thing missing from a classic Fascism pedagogy is a dictator… Hmmm didn’t Pres. Obama just reauthorize the Patriot Act? And why? Aren’t the entire Obama cabinet members an ushering in of wolves from Wall Street who are now fully guarding our hen house?! The answer is yes, yes, YES THEY ARE!

Categories: ALL OF THE ABOVE! · AM-BUSHED! · HERO'S & ZERO'S · INSIDE JOB · JON STEWART HERO! · KARL ROVE · LIES · PLASTIC SANDWICH · PROPOGANDA · SHAMWOW! · TAKIN' THE 5TH! · TRUTH · WHERE'S OSAMA!
Tagged: , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

A Second 9/11 in Slow Motion

March 25, 2009 · 4 Comments

A Second 9/11 in Slow Motion

Unlike 9/11, the economic crisis has produced no dust, no ash, no sirens. And yet the effect might be far more apocalyptic and the lives swallowed up far greater.

By Tom Engelhardt Mon March 23, 2009 9:34 AM PST

Economic Dirty Bomb Goes Off in New York

3284511708_c4f8c659c2 

With a Whimper, Not a Bang… the Old Neighborhood Empties

By Tom Engelhardt

A block from my apartment, on a still largely mom-and-pop, relatively low-slung stretch of Broadway, two spanking new apartment towers rose just as the good times were ending for New York. As I pass the tower on the west side of Broadway each morning, one of its massive ground-floor windows displays the same eternal message in white letters against a bright red background: “Locate yourself at the center of the fastest expanding portion of the affluent Upper West Side.” Successive windows assure any potential renter that this retail space (10,586 square feet available! 110 feet of frontage! 30 foot ceilings! Multiple configurations possible!) is conveniently located only “steps from the 96th Street subway station, servicing 11 million riders annually.”

Here’s the catch, though: That building was completed as 2007 ended and yet, were you to peer through a window into the gloom beyond, you would make out only a cavernous space of concrete, pillars, and pipes. All those “square feet” and not the slightest evidence that any business is moving in any time soon. Across Broadway, the same thing is true of the other tower. That once hopeful paean to an “expanding” and “affluent” neighborhood now seems like a notice from a lost era. Those signs, already oddly forlorn only months after our world began its full-scale economic meltdown, now seem like messages in a bottle floating in from BC: Before the Collapse. And it’s not just new buildings having problems either, judging by the increasing number of metal grills and shutters over storefronts in mid-day, all that brown butcher paper covering the insides of windows, or those omnipresent “for rent” and “for lease” signs hawking “retail space” with the names, phone numbers, and websites of real estate agents. I hadn’t paid much attention to any of this until, running late one drizzly evening about a month ago, and needing a piece of meat for dinner, I decided to stop at Oppenheimer’s, a butcher shop only three blocks from home. I had shopped there regularly until a new owner came in some years ago, and then the habit slowly died. The store still had its awning (“Oppenheimer, Established 1964, Prime Meats & Seafood”) and the same proud boast of “Steaks and Chops Cut to Order, Oven-ready roasts, Fresh-ground meats, Seasonal favorites,” but you couldn’t miss the “retail space available” sign in the window and, when I put my face to the glass, the shop’s insides had been gutted. Taken aback, I made my way home and said to my wife, “Did you know that Oppenheimer’s closed down?” She replied matter-of-factly, “That was months ago.” Okay, that’s me, not likely to win an award for awareness of my surroundings. Still, I soon found myself, notebook in hand, walking the neighborhood and looking. Really looking. Now, understand, in New York City, there’s nothing strange about small businesses going down, or buildings going up. It’s a city that, since birth, has regularly cannibalized itself. What’s strange in my experience—a New Yorker born and bred—is when storefronts, once emptied, aren’t quickly repopulated. Broadway in daylight now seems increasingly like an archeological dig in the making. Those storefronts with their fading decals (“Zagat rated”) and their old signs look, for all the world, like teeth knocked out of a mouth. In a city in which a section of Broadway was once known as the Great White Way for its profligate use of electricity, and everything normally is aglow at any hour, these dead commercial spaces feel like so many tiny black holes. Get on the wrong set of streets—Broadway’s hardly the worst—and New York can easily seem like a creeping vision of Hell, not as fire but as darkness slowly snuffing out the blaze of life.

A Stroll in the Neighborhood

Let me take you, then, on a little tour of the new face of my neighborhood. Along the ten blocks closest to my home, the banks (with one exception), the fast food restaurants (Subway, Dunkin’ Donuts, Blimpie), and above all the chain drugstores that crowd onto successive blocks (Rite Aid, Walgreens, Duane Reade) still stand. It’s the small places that seem to be dropping like flies. So here we go up those subway steps at 96th where a branch of WaMu (Washington Mutual Bank, placed in receivership by the FDIC in September 2008 and quickly sold to JP Morgan) stands empty. Now, start walking up the east side of Broadway, past Citibank on 96th and the Bank of America at the corner of 97th, until you come to little Alpine Sound Electronics, or the shell of it anyway, where I used to buy my cheap, waterproof watches for my daily swim at the Y. Now it’s gone, though an emphatic “sale, sale, sale, sale, sale” sign over the door is a reminder of its final moments. Take another sec and check out the other side of the street, where at mid-block a canopy advertising “Moroccan & Indian Home Decoratives… Aromatherapy… Exotic Gifts” still stands, but with a “Store for Rent” sign in the window and a desolate interior—a couple of ratty shelves, a single chair, a half-filled black garbage bag, and a broom. Right beside it is (or was) a tiny children’s clothing store. Its striped awning now sports a gaping hole in its center as if it had been hit by a missile, though its window still says, “Made in New York City… enjoyed worldwide!” Not so much today. But let’s not tarry. Keep going past 98th, by that butchered butcher shop, but do note, next to it, another vacancy, the shell that housed a small wine bar and restaurant, Vinacciolo, that came and went. Only two long, bare, narrow tables remain on a floor scattered with trash. Now, we’re almost at 100th, passing those two towers with their unrented frontages and, on the east side of the street, the classic façade of the old Metro movie house, closed to build one tower, and still empty. The cracked glass of the ticket teller’s booth backed by plywood gives the neighborhood that distinctive Last Picture Show feel. Just above 100th on the west side of Broadway is the store once occupied by Sterling Optical. They moved more than two years ago (I followed them faithfully) and the metal security grill has remained in place ever since. Ditto the storefront next to it, empty but for a little hand-lettered sign on the door, “Fedex Please Knock Hard”—it better be mighty hard!—and a tiny “Zagat Rated 2006 Shopping Guide” decal on the window. Well, you get the idea, if you haven’t already experienced the equivalent wherever you live. At 101st, A & S Art/Framing (“custom framing and mirrors”), a sliver of a store, has closed up shop. Between 102nd and 103rd, Planet Kids is emptying out. (“After 18 years we are closing on March 31st…”) On 103rd, the Royal Kabab & Curry restaurant has, like the optician, moved on to lower-rent digs without being replaced; and, on 105th, Tokyo Pop, a Japanese restaurant, all of whose wait staff mysteriously spoke English with French accents, has also disappeared, though its papered-over windows uniquely promise a “Pizzabar” in the Spring. (I’m not holding my breath.) Actually, if you head in just about any direction, the toll is apparent. Go south on Broadway from 96th, for instance, and you pass the same proliferating patches of emptiness. At 93rd, the tiny storefront of the all-detective bookstore Murder Ink, which closed on the last day of 2006 (about the moment when this deepening recession officially began), remains unoccupied. Further south, there are slaughtered neighborhood restaurants galore. Not surprisingly, even in food-mad New York, people are eating out less and our streets, except perhaps on a Saturday night, seem visibly less populated. Near the corner of 91st, Mary Ann’s, a festive Tex-Mex spot, bit the dust; just before 90th, the upscale seafood restaurant Docks Oyster Bar shut its doors so recently that its red “restaurant” sign is still lit (“Docks thanks you all for your loyal patronage over the years but this restaurant is now closed…”); at the corner of 88th, in the spacious two-floor space that used to house Boulevard (on whose paper tablecloths my kids and I drew faces with restaurant-provided crayons), and then a dizzying succession of restaurants whose names escape me, the bar chairs are carefully stored upside down on the bar and a “For Rent” sign is in the window; and, on 77th, Ruby Foo’s, a giant pan-Asian joint, described by Zagat’s as “Disneyfied,” has shut, too.
Only below 72nd street, where the neighborhood gets noticeably tonier, and the banks (TD, HSBC, Capital One, Chase, Bank of America) begin to breed and multiply, and the urban mall stores (Pottery Barn, Barnes & Noble, The Gap, Bed Bath & Beyond) proliferate, do the deaths end (except for a Circuit City branch at the corner of 67th that went down with that bankrupt chain). Here, stores are still clean, well-lighted places, though a remarkable number of them sport signs that say: “save up to 50%,” “up to 70% off…”

9/11, The Sequel

Let’s not exaggerate. New York City is not downtown Elkhart, Indiana—not yet anyway (although the other night on Amsterdam Avenue, just east of Broadway, I noted a block of 12 tiny storefronts, nine of which had been emptied). Yes, rents on avenues like Broadway remain sky-high and, these days, getting a bank loan if you’re a small start-up is bloody murder, and the city’s zoos are losing their state funding, the hospitals are getting rid of staff, the metropolitan Museum of Art is having layoffs, the unemployment rate is rising fast, property values are sinking, mass transit riders are facing fare increases as well as major service cuts, and the Greater New York Orchid Society has canceled its annual show. Nonetheless, this global financial capital is still surfing the final modest wavelets of the tsunami of money that flowed through its veins in the good times (some of which continues to head “our” way, thanks to government bailout plans). Still, as you walk past those patches of darkness, a thought almost can’t help but form. For the last seven years, we’ve been waiting for 9/11, The Sequel, to arrive from Afghanistan or some similar place. The media has regularly featured fantasy scenarios in which Islamic terrorists sneak atomic bombs or “dirty bombs” into cities like New York and set them off. ABC’s Charles Gibson even highlighted such a possibility in a Democratic presidential debate. (“I want to go to another question… The next president of the United States may have to deal with a nuclear attack on an American city. I’ve read a lot about this in recent days. The best nuclear experts in the world say there’s a 30 percent chance in the next 10 years…”) And the Bush administration claimed as one of its great accomplishments the prevention of a repeat of 9/11. And yet, in a sense, as on September 11, 2001, maybe we were just looking the wrong way. After all, you might say that an economic dirty bomb did go off in downtown New York and this city (not to say, the nation and the world) has been experiencing a second 9/11 ever since, even if in slow motion.

In my neighborhood, back in those fateful September days in 2001, you could hear the sirens, see the jets streak overhead, catch the acrid smell of the towers and everything chemical in them burning, and like the rest of America, watch those apocalyptic-looking scenes of the towers collapsing in clouds of ash and smoke again and again. But if the look then was apocalyptic, the damage, however grim, was limited. This time around there’s no dust, no ash, no acrid smell, no sirens, no jets, and no brave rescuers either. And yet the effect might, sooner or later, be far more apocalyptic and the lives swallowed up far greater. This time, of course, the fanatical extremists were homegrown. Their “caves” were on Wall Street. They hijacked our economy and did their level best to take down our world.
And they may have come closer than most of us imagine. Alpine Sound and Oppenheimer, Tokyo Pop and Planet Kids, Docks and Ruby Foo’s have all gone down (and more are surely headed that way). For the people who owned, or ran, or worked in them, unlike the survivors of the original 9/11, there will be no moving bios in the local papers, no talk of compensation, and no majestic memorials to argue about.

For the perpetrators, who have, at worst, gone home pocketing their millions, there will be no retribution. No invasions will be launched, no missiles shot into homes or hideouts. None of them will be pursued to their lairs, or kidnapped off the streets of New York, or from their palatial mansions, or apartments, or estates. None will be spirited to foreign lands to be imprisoned and tortured. None will be labeled “enemy combatants.”
Quite the opposite, in 9/11, The Sequel, the U.S. government is willing to pay many of them and their institutions in the multi-billions for their time and further efforts.

In the second 9/11, all the pain and torture is in the neighborhood.

Copyright 2009 Tom Engelhardt

Editor’s Comment:

by Jack Mosel

Didn’t “Osama Bin hiden” say something like “he’d ruin us by wrecking our economy?” The unfortunate ‘collamiterious’, coincidental and slippery slopes we’ve been made to endure for IRONICALLY the last 8 years, seem to have been orchestrated to fit an evil and dire plan… Fommented by persons who had to have incredible influence, monetary resources, been in places of high power and whom have had sheer evil in their hearts for some time now…

The reason I say this is because of the coincidental occurrances which seem to only have “benefitted” those whom have been ready at the helm to most benefit from these human tragedies. 9/11 has had much controversy about its’ origins, its occurance, its timeline in chronology, its’ conveinient use as an excuse to commit us to all out war and sadly, the foreknowledge of it prior to its occurance from many government officials, evidenced through monetary preparations from Wall Street “Insiders” and last minute cancellations of travel plans to again insiders, being urged not to fly that day. There were the FEMA personell of which 1200 just happened to be in place on the island of Manhattan?! and the foreknowledge of Buildings falling from fire which never happened before and yes Building 7, which fell into dust after its entire structure simultaneously failed structurally and it defied all known physics and common sense when it fell into its’ own footprint at free fall speed… Even the concrete was pulverized into dust smaller than physically possible from merely a Pancake collapse.

The villain who appeared immediately with a prepared CIA and FBI jacket handy at light speed was OBL, George Bush’s business partner from college or Osama Bin Lyin’. The trotting out of OBL, the conveinient lies told to take advantage of our emotional pain from the most heinous act committed on our soil since WWII, Bush Invades Iraq!? Cheney Cherry picks the intel, months before 9/11 and Cheney’s got Halliburton receiving no-bid oil field contracts FOR IRAQ?! … Okay, you get the point.

The last thing in the last 10 seconds coming out of the BUSH/CHENEY administration is the economic meltdown “SHOT HEARD ROUND THE WORLD”… The Federal reserve and the federal government and the wall street insiders are all rallying around the chuck wagon and each one’s got a ladel in their hand…

I’m done with the coincidence thing… Bad things happen in threes (maybe) but not eight, now nine years of successive occurances, one even more dire than the next… and always there’s a puking, pugilist politician at the end of the line smirking, finger out pointing and telling us about how we caused this or how the Democrats caused that or how the Alquedians caused this or how the Osama been hiden’s been causing this… STFU Boehner, McSHAME, CHENEY.

BTW CHENEY… RE: SAFER?! YOU’RE ONE TO TALK ABOUT MAKING US SAFER PUNK! we see you..

F.U. NWO… JUST F.U. already!

Let’s not tear each other as citizens apart Republicans Democrats… Nonesense. The politicians are dirty as sin. I only trust the ones that are calling for Constitutional order and FOUL amongst themselves and IMPEACHMENT and TRIALS and HEARINGS and TORTURE PROSECUTIONS!

These NWO FASCISTS ARE PLAYING US!!! Joe the $8.00 an hour Plumber’s helper is a cheap fraud, a distraction, A Shamwowist! as is Rush Limburger, Anne Culture (Like from a rotting petri dish) is an agent Provocateur and a plastic sandwich lunchroom lady, Bill O is a clown and BUSH / CHENEY are criminals! Karl ROVE is on borrowed time and DENNIS KUCINICH AND RON PAUL ARE THE REAL DEAL!

End the Fed… Where the HELL IS OSAMA?!

Categories: ALL OF THE ABOVE! · AM-BUSHED! · HERO'S & ZERO'S · INSIDE JOB · JON STEWART HERO! · KARL ROVE · LIES · PLASTIC SANDWICH · PROPOGANDA · SHAMWOW! · TAKIN' THE 5TH! · TRUTH · WHERE'S OSAMA!
Tagged: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

A Bit of Common Sense from Thomas Paine (Video)

March 23, 2009 · 3 Comments

AN URGENT MESSAGE FOR AMERICA

Thomas Paine, American revolutionary and author of “Common Sense,” has returned to earth with an urgent message. (OK, we’re just kidding about that Payne coming back from the dead part…actually, the guy in the video is a Thomas Paine impersonator from Hawaii)

This video has become a sensation on YouTube, with over a quarter-million views so far.

So, if Thomas Paine were here today, would he be labeled as a right-wing extremist? (Funny, he was considered a liberal 200+ years ago) Would they call him a conspiracy nutter? A tinfoil hat? A barking moonbat?

Well????????

Would Thomas Paine still be considered a hero, an inspiration, today?

Nah…they’d probably think he’s a terrorist and ship him off to Guantanamo.

 

 

Categories: ALL OF THE ABOVE! · HERO'S & ZERO'S · TRUTH · Uncategorized
Tagged: , , , , , , , ,

The Big Takeover

March 22, 2009 · 7 Comments

rolling-stone

 

The Big Takeover

 

The global economic crisis isn’t about money – it’s about power. How Wall Street insiders are using the bailout to stage a revolution.

MATT TAIBBIPosted Mar 19, 2009 12:49 PM

It’s over — we’re officially, royally fucked. no empire can survive being rendered a permanent laughingstock, which is what happened as of a few weeks ago, when the buffoons who have been running things in this country finally went one step too far. It happened when Treasury Secretary Timothy Geithner was forced to admit that he was once again going to have to stuff billions of taxpayer dollars into a dying insurance giant called AIG, itself a profound symbol of our national decline — a corporation that got rich insuring the concrete and steel of American industry in the country’s heyday, only to destroy itself chasing phantom fortunes at the Wall Street card tables, like a dissolute nobleman gambling away the family estate in the waning days of the British Empire.
The latest bailout came as AIG admitted to having just posted the largest quarterly loss in American corporate history — some $61.7 billion. In the final three months of last year, the company lost more than $27 million every hour. That’s $465,000 a minute, a yearly income for a median American household every six seconds, roughly $7,750 a second. And all this happened at the end of eight straight years that America devoted to frantically chasing the shadow of a terrorist threat to no avail, eight years spent stopping every citizen at every airport to search every purse, bag, crotch and briefcase for juice boxes and explosive tubes of toothpaste. Yet in the end, our government had no mechanism for searching the balance sheets of companies that held life-or-death power over our society and was unable to spot holes in the national economy the size of Libya (whose entire GDP last year was smaller than AIG’s 2008 losses).

     So it’s time to admit it: We’re fools, protagonists in a kind of gruesome comedy about the marriage of greed and stupidity. And the worst part about it is that we’re still in denial — we still think this is some kind of unfortunate accident, not something that was created by the group of psychopaths on Wall Street whom we allowed to gang-rape the American Dream. When Geithner announced the new $30 billion bailout, the party line was that poor AIG was just a victim of a lot of shitty luck — bad year for business, you know, what with the financial crisis and all. Edward Liddy, the company’s CEO, actually compared it to catching a cold: “The marketplace is a pretty crummy place to be right now,” he said. “When the world catches pneumonia, we get it too.” In a pathetic attempt at name-dropping, he even whined that AIG was being “consumed by the same issues that are driving house prices down and 401K statements down and Warren Buffet’s investment portfolio down.” 

    Liddy made AIG sound like an orphan begging in a soup line, hungry and sick from being left out in someone else’s financial weather. He conveniently forgot to mention that AIG had spent more than a decade systematically scheming to evade U.S. and international regulators, or that one of the causes of its “pneumonia” was making colossal, world-sinking $500 billion bets with money it didn’t have, in a toxic and completely unregulated derivatives market. Nor did anyone mention that when AIG finally got up from its seat at the Wall Street casino, broke and busted in the afterdawn light, it owed money all over town — and that a huge chunk of your taxpayer dollars in this particular bailout scam will be going to pay off the other high rollers at its table. Or that this was a casino unique among all casinos, one where middle-class taxpayers cover the bets of billionaires.

      People are pissed off about this financial crisis, and about this bailout, but they’re not pissed off enough. The reality is that the worldwide economic meltdown and the bailout that followed were together a kind of revolution, a coup d’état. They cemented and formalized a political trend that has been snowballing for decades: the gradual takeover of the government by a small class of connected insiders, who used money to control elections, buy influence and systematically weaken financial regulations.

     The crisis was the coup de grâce: Given virtually free rein over the economy, these same insiders first wrecked the financial world, then cunningly granted themselves nearly unlimited emergency powers to clean up their own mess. And so the gambling-addict leaders of companies like AIG end up not penniless and in jail, but with an Alien-style death grip on the Treasury and the Federal Reserve — “our partners in the government,” as Liddy put it with a shockingly casual matter-of-factness after the most recent bailout.

     The mistake most people make in looking at the financial crisis is thinking of it in terms of money, a habit that might lead you to look at the unfolding mess as a huge bonus-killing downer for the Wall Street class. But if you look at it in purely Machiavellian terms, what you see is a colossal power grab that threatens to turn the federal government into a kind of giant Enron — a huge, impenetrable black box filled with self-dealing insiders whose scheme is the securing of individual profits at the expense of an ocean of unwitting involuntary shareholders, previously known as taxpayers.

I. PATIENT ZERO

     The best way to understand the financial crisis is to understand the meltdown at AIG. AIG is what happens when short, bald managers of otherwise boring financial bureaucracies start seeing Brad Pitt in the mirror. This is a company that built a giant fortune across more than a century by betting on safety-conscious policyholders — people who wear seat belts and build houses on high ground — and then blew it all in a year or two by turning their entire balance sheet over to a guy who acted like making huge bets with other people’s money would make his dick bigger.

     That guy — the Patient Zero of the global economic meltdown — was one Joseph Cassano, the head of a tiny, 400-person unit within the company called AIG Financial Products, or AIGFP. Cassano, a pudgy, balding Brooklyn College grad with beady eyes and way too much forehead, cut his teeth in the Eighties working for Mike Milken, the granddaddy of modern Wall Street debt alchemists. Milken, who pioneered the creative use of junk bonds, relied on messianic genius and a whole array of insider schemes to evade detection while wreaking financial disaster. Cassano, by contrast, was just a greedy little turd with a knack for selective accounting who ran his scam right out in the open, thanks to Washington’s deregulation of the Wall Street casino. “It’s all about the regulatory environment,” says a government source involved with the AIG bailout. “These guys look for holes in the system, for ways they can do trades without government interference. Whatever is unregulated, all the action is going to pile into that.”

     The mess Cassano created had its roots in an investment boom fueled in part by a relatively new type of financial instrument called a collateralized-debt obligation. A CDO is like a box full of diced-up assets. They can be anything: mortgages, corporate loans, aircraft loans, credit-card loans, even other CDOs. So as X mortgage holder pays his bill, and Y corporate debtor pays his bill, and Z credit-card debtor pays his bill, money flows into the box.

     The key idea behind a CDO is that there will always be at least some money in the box, regardless of how dicey the individual assets inside it are. No matter how you look at a single unemployed ex-con trying to pay the note on a six-bedroom house, he looks like a bad investment. But dump his loan in a box with a smorgasbord of auto loans, credit-card debt, corporate bonds and other crap, and you can be reasonably sure that somebody is going to pay up. Say $100 is supposed to come into the box every month. Even in an apocalypse, when $90 in payments might default, you’ll still get $10. What the inventors of the CDO did is divide up the box into groups of investors and put that $10 into its own level, or “tranche.” They then convinced ratings agencies like Moody’s and S&P to give that top tranche the highest AAA rating — meaning it has close to zero credit risk.

     Suddenly, thanks to this financial seal of approval, banks had a way to turn their shittiest mortgages and other financial waste into investment-grade paper and sell them to institutional investors like pensions and insurance companies, which were forced by regulators to keep their portfolios as safe as possible. Because CDOs offered higher rates of return than truly safe products like Treasury bills, it was a win-win: Banks made a fortune selling CDOs, and big investors made much more holding them.

     The problem was, none of this was based on reality. “The banks knew they were selling crap,” says a London-based trader from one of the bailed-out companies. To get AAA ratings, the CDOs relied not on their actual underlying assets but on crazy mathematical formulas that the banks cooked up to make the investments look safer than they really were. “They had some back room somewhere where a bunch of Indian guys who’d been doing nothing but math for God knows how many years would come up with some kind of model saying that this or that combination of debtors would only default once every 10,000 years,” says one young trader who sold CDOs for a major investment bank. “It was nuts.”

     Now that even the crappiest mortgages could be sold to conservative investors, the CDOs spurred a massive explosion of irresponsible and predatory lending. In fact, there was such a crush to underwrite CDOs that it became hard to find enough subprime mortgages — read: enough unemployed meth dealers willing to buy million-dollar homes for no money down — to fill them all. As banks and investors of all kinds took on more and more in CDOs and similar instruments, they needed some way to hedge their massive bets — some kind of insurance policy, in case the housing bubble burst and all that debt went south at the same time. This was particularly true for investment banks, many of which got stuck holding or “warehousing” CDOs when they wrote more than they could sell. And that’s were Joe Cassano came in.

     Known for his boldness and arrogance, Cassano took over as chief of AIGFP in 2001. He was the favorite of Maurice “Hank” Greenberg, the head of AIG, who admired the younger man’s hard-driving ways, even if neither he nor his successors fully understood exactly what it was that Cassano did. According to a source familiar with AIG’s internal operations, Cassano basically told senior management, “You know insurance, I know investments, so you do what you do, and I’ll do what I do — leave me alone.” Given a free hand within the company, Cassano set out from his offices in London to sell a lucrative form of “insurance” to all those investors holding lots of CDOs. His tool of choice was another new financial instrument known as a credit-default swap, or CDS.

     The CDS was popularized by J.P. Morgan, in particular by a group of young, creative bankers who would later become known as the “Morgan Mafia,” as many of them would go on to assume influential positions in the finance world. In 1994, in between booze and games of tennis at a resort in Boca Raton, Florida, the Morgan gang plotted a way to help boost the bank’s returns. One of their goals was to find a way to lend more money, while working around regulations that required them to keep a set amount of cash in reserve to back those loans. What they came up with was an early version of the credit-default swap.

     In its simplest form, a CDS is just a bet on an outcome. Say Bank A writes a million-dollar mortgage to the Pope for a town house in the West Village. Bank A wants to hedge its mortgage risk in case the Pope can’t make his monthly payments, so it buys CDS protection from Bank B, wherein it agrees to pay Bank B a premium of $1,000 a month for five years. In return, Bank B agrees to pay Bank A the full million-dollar value of the Pope’s mortgage if he defaults. In theory, Bank A is covered if the Pope goes on a meth binge and loses his job.

     When Morgan presented their plans for credit swaps to regulators in the late Nineties, they argued that if they bought CDS protection for enough of the investments in their portfolio, they had effectively moved the risk off their books. Therefore, they argued, they should be allowed to lend more, without keeping more cash in reserve. A whole host of regulators — from the Federal Reserve to the Office of the Comptroller of the Currency — accepted the argument, and Morgan was allowed to put more money on the street.

     What Cassano did was to transform the credit swaps that Morgan popularized into the world’s largest bet on the housing boom. In theory, at least, there’s nothing wrong with buying a CDS to insure your investments. Investors paid a premium to AIGFP, and in return the company promised to pick up the tab if the mortgage-backed CDOs went bust. But as Cassano went on a selling spree, the deals he made differed from traditional insurance in several significant ways. First, the party selling CDS protection didn’t have to post any money upfront. When a $100 corporate bond is sold, for example, someone has to show 100 actual dollars. But when you sell a $100 CDS guarantee, you don’t have to show a dime. So Cassano could sell investment banks billions in guarantees without having any single asset to back it up. Secondly, Cassano was selling so-called “naked” CDS deals. In a “naked” CDS, neither party actually holds the underlying loan. In other words, Bank B not only sells CDS protection to Bank A for its mortgage on the Pope — it turns around and sells protection to Bank C for the very same mortgage. This could go on ad nauseam: You could have Banks D through Z also betting on Bank A’s mortgage. Unlike traditional insurance, Cassano was offering investors an opportunity to bet that someone else’s house would burn down, or take out a term life policy on the guy with AIDS down the street. It was no different from gambling, the Wall Street version of a bunch of frat brothers betting on Jay Feely to make a field goal. Cassano was taking book for every bank that bet short on the housing market, but he didn’t have the cash to pay off if the kick went wide.

     In a span of only seven years, Cassano sold some $500 billion worth of CDS protection, with at least $64 billion of that tied to the subprime mortgage market. AIG didn’t have even a fraction of that amount of cash on hand to cover its bets, but neither did it expect it would ever need any reserves. So long as defaults on the underlying securities remained a highly unlikely proposition, AIG was essentially collecting huge and steadily climbing premiums by selling insurance for the disaster it thought would never come. Initially, at least, the revenues were enormous: AIGFP’s returns went from $737 million in 1999 to $3.2 billion in 2005. Over the past seven years, the subsidiary’s 400 employees were paid a total of $3.5 billion; Cassano himself pocketed at least $280 million in compensation. Everyone made their money — and then it all went to shit.

II. THE REGULATORS

     Cassano’s outrageous gamble wouldn’t have been possible had he not had the good fortune to take over AIGFP just as Sen. Phil Gramm — a grinning, laissez-faire ideologue from Texas — had finished engineering the most dramatic deregulation of the financial industry since Emperor Hien Tsung invented paper money in 806 A.D. For years, Washington had kept a watchful eye on the nation’s banks. Ever since the Great Depression, commercial banks — those that kept money on deposit for individuals and businesses — had not been allowed to double as investment banks, which raise money by issuing and selling securities. The Glass-Steagall Act, passed during the Depression, also prevented banks of any kind from getting into the insurance business. But in the late Nineties, a few years before Cassano took over AIGFP, all that changed. The Democrats, tired of getting slaughtered in the fundraising arena by Republicans, decided to throw off their old reliance on unions and interest groups and become more “business-friendly.” Wall Street responded by flooding Washington with money, buying allies in both parties. In the 10-year period beginning in 1998, financial companies spent $1.7 billion on federal campaign contributions and another $3.4 billion on lobbyists. They quickly got what they paid for. In 1999, Gramm co-sponsored a bill that repealed key aspects of the Glass-Steagall Act, smoothing the way for the creation of financial megafirms like Citigroup. The move did away with the built-in protections afforded by smaller banks. In the old days, a local banker knew the people whose loans were on his balance sheet: He wasn’t going to give a million-dollar mortgage to a homeless meth addict, since he would have to keep that loan on his books. But a giant merged bank might write that loan and then sell it off to some fool in China, and who cared?

     The very next year, Gramm compounded the problem by writing a sweeping new law called the Commodity Futures Modernization Act that made it impossible to regulate credit swaps as either gambling or securities. Commercial banks — which, thanks to Gramm, were now competing directly with investment banks for customers — were driven to buy credit swaps to loosen capital in search of higher yields. “By ruling that credit-default swaps were not gaming and not a security, the way was cleared for the growth of the market,” said Eric Dinallo, head of the New York State Insurance Department.

     The blanket exemption meant that Joe Cassano could now sell as many CDS contracts as he wanted, building up as huge a position as he wanted, without anyone in government saying a word. “You have to remember, investment banks aren’t in the business of making huge directional bets,” says the government source involved in the AIG bailout. When investment banks write CDS deals, they hedge them. But insurance companies don’t have to hedge. And that’s what AIG did. “They just bet massively long on the housing market,” says the source. “Billions and billions.”

     In the biggest joke of all, Cassano’s wheeling and dealing was regulated by the Office of Thrift Supervision, an agency that would prove to be defiantly uninterested in keeping watch over his operations. How a behemoth like AIG came to be regulated by the little-known and relatively small OTS is yet another triumph of the deregulatory instinct. Under another law passed in 1999, certain kinds of holding companies could choose the OTS as their regulator, provided they owned one or more thrifts (better known as savings-and-loans). Because the OTS was viewed as more compliant than the Fed or the Securities and Exchange Commission, companies rushed to reclassify themselves as thrifts. In 1999, AIG purchased a thrift in Delaware and managed to get approval for OTS regulation of its entire operation.

     Making matters even more hilarious, AIGFP — a London-based subsidiary of an American insurance company — ought to have been regulated by one of Europe’s more stringent regulators, like Britain’s Financial Services Authority. But the OTS managed to convince the Europeans that it had the muscle to regulate these giant companies. By 2007, the EU had conferred legitimacy to OTS supervision of three mammoth firms — GE, AIG and Ameriprise. That same year, as the subprime crisis was exploding, the Government Accountability Office criticized the OTS, noting a “disparity between the size of the agency and the diverse firms it oversees.” Among other things, the GAO report noted that the entire OTS had only one insurance specialist on staff — and this despite the fact that it was the primary regulator for the world’s largest insurer!

     “There’s this notion that the regulators couldn’t do anything to stop AIG,” says a government official who was present during the bailout. “That’s bullshit. What you have to understand is that these regulators have ultimate power. They can send you a letter and say, ‘You don’t exist anymore,’ and that’s basically that. They don’t even really need due process. The OTS could have said, ‘We’re going to pull your charter; we’re going to pull your license; we’re going to sue you.’ And getting sued by your primary regulator is the kiss of death.”

     When AIG finally blew up, the OTS regulator ostensibly in charge of overseeing the insurance giant — a guy named C.K. Lee — basically admitted that he had blown it. His mistake, Lee said, was that he believed all those credit swaps in Cassano’s portfolio were “fairly benign products.” Why? Because the company told him so. “The judgment the company was making was that there was no big credit risk,” he explained. (Lee now works as Midwest region director of the OTS; the agency declined to make him available for an interview.)

     In early March, after the latest bailout of AIG, Treasury Secretary Timothy Geithner took what seemed to be a thinly veiled shot at the OTS, calling AIG a “huge, complex global insurance company attached to a very complicated investment bank/hedge fund that was allowed to build up without any adult supervision.” But even without that “adult supervision,” AIG might have been OK had it not been for a complete lack of internal controls. For six months before its meltdown, according to insiders, the company had been searching for a full-time chief financial officer and a chief risk-assessment officer, but never got around to hiring either. That meant that the 18th-largest company in the world had no one checking to make sure its balance sheet was safe and no one keeping track of how much cash and assets the firm had on hand. The situation was so bad that when outside consultants were called in a few weeks before the bailout, senior executives were unable to answer even the most basic questions about their company — like, for instance, how much exposure the firm had to the residential-mortgage market.

III. THE CRASH

     Ironically, when reality finally caught up to Cassano, it wasn’t because the housing market crapped but because of AIG itself. Before 2005, the company’s debt was rated triple-A, meaning he didn’t need to post much cash to sell CDS protection: The solid creditworthiness of AIG’s name was guarantee enough. But the company’s crummy accounting practices eventually caused its credit rating to be downgraded, triggering clauses in the CDS contracts that forced Cassano to post substantially more collateral to back his deals.

     By the fall of 2007, it was evident that AIGFP’s portfolio had turned poisonous, but like every good Wall Street huckster, Cassano schemed to keep his insane, Earth-swallowing gamble hidden from public view. That August, balls bulging, he announced to investors on a conference call that “it is hard for us, without being flippant, to even see a scenario within any kind of realm of reason that would see us losing $1 in any of those transactions.” As he spoke, his CDS portfolio was racking up $352 million in losses. When the growing credit crunch prompted senior AIG executives to re-examine its liabilities, a company accountant named Joseph St. Denis became “gravely concerned” about the CDS deals and their potential for mass destruction. Cassano responded by personally forcing the poor sap out of the firm, telling him he was “deliberately excluded” from the financial review for fear that he might “pollute the process.”

     The following February, when AIG posted $11.5 billion in annual losses, it announced the resignation of Cassano as head of AIGFP, saying an auditor had found a “material weakness” in the CDS portfolio. But amazingly, the company not only allowed Cassano to keep $34 million in bonuses, it kept him on as a consultant for $1 million a month. In fact, Cassano remained on the payroll and kept collecting his monthly million through the end of September 2008, even after taxpayers had been forced to hand AIG $85 billion to patch up his fuck-ups. When asked in October why the company still retained Cassano at his $1 million-a-month rate despite his role in the probable downfall of Western civilization, CEO Martin Sullivan told Congress with a straight face that AIG wanted to “retain the 20-year knowledge that Mr. Cassano had.” (Cassano, who is apparently hiding out in his lavish town house near Harrods in London, could not be reached for comment.)

     What sank AIG in the end was another credit downgrade. Cassano had written so many CDS deals that when the company was facing another downgrade to its credit rating last September, from AA to A, it needed to post billions in collateral — not only more cash than it had on its balance sheet but more cash than it could raise even if it sold off every single one of its liquid assets. Even so, management dithered for days, not believing the company was in serious trouble. AIG was a dried-up prune, sapped of any real value, and its top executives didn’t even know it.

     On the weekend of September 13th, AIG’s senior leaders were summoned to the offices of the New York Federal Reserve. Regulators from Dinallo’s insurance office were there, as was Geithner, then chief of the New York Fed. Treasury Secretary Hank Paulson, who spent most of the weekend preoccupied with the collapse of Lehman Brothers, came in and out. Also present, for reasons that would emerge later, was Lloyd Blankfein, CEO of Goldman Sachs. The only relevant government office that wasn’t represented was the regulator that should have been there all along: the OTS.

“We sat down with Paulson, Geithner and Dinallo,” says a person present at the negotiations. “I didn’t see the OTS even once.”

     On September 14th, according to another person present, Treasury officials presented Blankfein and other bankers in attendance with an absurd proposal: “They basically asked them to spend a day and check to see if they could raise the money privately.” The laughably short time span to complete the mammoth task made the answer a foregone conclusion. At the end of the day, the bankers came back and told the government officials, gee, we checked, but we can’t raise that much. And the bailout was on. A short time later, it came out that AIG was planning to pay some $90 million in deferred compensation to former executives, and to accelerate the payout of $277 million in bonuses to others — a move the company insisted was necessary to “retain key employees.” When Congress balked, AIG canceled the $90 million in payments. Then, in January 2009, the company did it again. After all those years letting Cassano run wild, and after already getting caught paying out insane bonuses while on the public till, AIG decided to pay out another $450 million in bonuses. And to whom? To the 400 or so employees in Cassano’s old unit, AIGFP, which is due to go out of business shortly! Yes, that’s right, an average of $1.1 million in taxpayer-backed money apiece, to the very people who spent the past decade or so punching a hole in the fabric of the universe!

“We, uh, needed to keep these highly expert people in their seats,” AIG spokeswoman Christina Pretto says to me in early February.

“But didn’t these ‘highly expert people’ basically destroy your company?” I ask. Pretto protests, says this isn’t fair. The employees at AIGFP have already taken pay cuts, she says. Not retaining them would dilute the value of the company even further, make it harder to wrap up the unit’s operations in an orderly fashion.

     The bonuses are a nice comic touch highlighting one of the more outrageous tangents of the bailout age, namely the fact that, even with the planet in flames, some members of the Wall Street class can’t even get used to the tragedy of having to fly coach. “These people need their trips to Baja, their spa treatments, their hand jobs,” says an official involved in the AIG bailout, a serious look on his face, apparently not even half-kidding. “They don’t function well without them.”

IV. THE POWER GRAB

     So that’s the first step in wall street’s power grab: making up things like credit-default swaps and collateralized-debt obligations, financial products so complex and inscrutable that ordinary American dumb people — to say nothing of federal regulators and even the CEOs of major corporations like AIG — are too intimidated to even try to understand them. That, combined with wise political investments, enabled the nation’s top bankers to effectively scrap any meaningful oversight of the financial industry. In 1997 and 1998, the years leading up to the passage of Phil Gramm’s fateful act that gutted Glass-Steagall, the banking, brokerage and insurance industries spent $350 million on political contributions and lobbying. Gramm alone — then the chairman of the Senate Banking Committee — collected $2.6 million in only five years. The law passed 90-8 in the Senate, with the support of 38 Democrats, including some names that might surprise you: Joe Biden, John Kerry, Tom Daschle, Dick Durbin, even John Edwards.
The act helped create the too-big-to-fail financial behemoths like Citigroup, AIG and Bank of America — and in turn helped those companies slowly crush their smaller competitors, leaving the major Wall Street firms with even more money and power to lobby for further deregulatory measures. “We’re moving to an oligopolistic situation,” Kenneth Guenther, a top executive with the Independent Community Bankers of America, lamented after the Gramm measure was passed.

     The situation worsened in 2004, in an extraordinary move toward deregulation that never even got to a vote. At the time, the European Union was threatening to more strictly regulate the foreign operations of America’s big investment banks if the U.S. didn’t strengthen its own oversight. So the top five investment banks got together on April 28th of that year and — with the helpful assistance of then-Goldman Sachs chief and future Treasury Secretary Hank Paulson — made a pitch to George Bush’s SEC chief at the time, William Donaldson, himself a former investment banker. The banks generously volunteered to submit to new rules restricting them from engaging in excessively risky activity. In exchange, they asked to be released from any lending restrictions. The discussion about the new rules lasted just 55 minutes, and there was not a single representative of a major media outlet there to record the fateful decision.

     Donaldson OK’d the proposal, and the new rules were enough to get the EU to drop its threat to regulate the five firms. The only catch was, neither Donaldson nor his successor, Christopher Cox, actually did any regulating of the banks. They named a commission of seven people to oversee the five companies, whose combined assets came to total more than $4 trillion. But in the last year and a half of Cox’s tenure, the group had no director and did not complete a single inspection. Great deal for the banks, which originally complained about being regulated by both Europe and the SEC, and ended up being regulated by no one.

     Once the capital requirements were gone, those top five banks went hog-wild, jumping ass-first into the then-raging housing bubble. One of those was Bear Stearns, which used its freedom to drown itself in bad mortgage loans. In the short period between the 2004 change and Bear’s collapse, the firm’s debt-to-equity ratio soared from 12-1 to an insane 33-1. Another culprit was Goldman Sachs, which also had the good fortune, around then, to see its CEO, a bald-headed Frankensteinian goon named Hank Paulson (who received an estimated $200 million tax deferral by joining the government), ascend to Treasury secretary. Freed from all capital restraints, sitting pretty with its man running the Treasury, Goldman jumped into the housing craze just like everyone else on Wall Street. Although it famously scored an $11 billion coup in 2007 when one of its trading units smartly shorted the housing market, the move didn’t tell the whole story. In truth, Goldman still had a huge exposure come that fateful summer of 2008 — to none other than Joe Cassano.

     Goldman Sachs, it turns out, was Cassano’s biggest customer, with $20 billion of exposure in Cassano’s CDS book. Which might explain why Goldman chief Lloyd Blankfein was in the room with ex-Goldmanite Hank Paulson that weekend of September 13th, when the federal government was supposedly bailing out AIG. When asked why Blankfein was there, one of the government officials who was in the meeting shrugs. “One might say that it’s because Goldman had so much exposure to AIGFP’s portfolio,” he says. “You’ll never prove that, but one might suppose.”

Market analyst Eric Salzman is more blunt. “If AIG went down,” he says, “there was a good chance Goldman would not be able to collect.” The AIG bailout, in effect, was Goldman bailing out Goldman.

     Eventually, Paulson went a step further, elevating another ex-Goldmanite named Edward Liddy to run AIG — a company whose bailout money would be coming, in part, from the newly created TARP program, administered by another Goldman banker named Neel Kashkari.

V. REPO MEN

     There are plenty of people who have noticed, in recent years, that when they lost their homes to foreclosure or were forced into bankruptcy because of crippling credit-card debt, no one in the government was there to rescue them. But when Goldman Sachs — a company whose average employee still made more than $350,000 last year, even in the midst of a depression — was suddenly faced with the possibility of losing money on the unregulated insurance deals it bought for its insane housing bets, the government was there in an instant to patch the hole. That’s the essence of the bailout: rich bankers bailing out rich bankers, using the taxpayers’ credit card.

     The people who have spent their lives cloistered in this Wall Street community aren’t much for sharing information with the great unwashed. Because all of this shit is complicated, because most of us mortals don’t know what the hell LIBOR is or how a REIT works or how to use the word “zero coupon bond” in a sentence without sounding stupid — well, then, the people who do speak this idiotic language cannot under any circumstances be bothered to explain it to us and instead spend a lot of time rolling their eyes and asking us to trust them. That roll of the eyes is a key part of the psychology of Paulsonism. The state is now being asked not just to call off its regulators or give tax breaks or funnel a few contracts to connected companies; it is intervening directly in the economy, for the sole purpose of preserving the influence of the megafirms. In essence, Paulson used the bailout to transform the government into a giant bureaucracy of entitled assholedom, one that would socialize “toxic” risks but keep both the profits and the management of the bailed-out firms in private hands. Moreover, this whole process would be done in secret, away from the prying eyes of NASCAR dads, broke-ass liberals who read translations of French novels, subprime mortgage holders and other such financial losers.

     Some aspects of the bailout were secretive to the point of absurdity. In fact, if you look closely at just a few lines in the Federal Reserve’s weekly public disclosures, you can literally see the moment where a big chunk of your money disappeared for good. The H4 report (called “Factors Affecting Reserve Balances”) summarizes the activities of the Fed each week. You can find it online, and it’s pretty much the only thing the Fed ever tells the world about what it does. For the week ending February 18th, the number under the heading “Repurchase Agreements” on the table is zero. It’s a significant number.

     Why? In the pre-crisis days, the Fed used to manage the money supply by periodically buying and selling securities on the open market through so-called Repurchase Agreements, or Repos. The Fed would typically dump $25 billion or so in cash onto the market every week, buying up Treasury bills, U.S. securities and even mortgage-backed securities from institutions like Goldman Sachs and J.P. Morgan, who would then “repurchase” them in a short period of time, usually one to seven days. This was the Fed’s primary mechanism for controlling interest rates: Buying up securities gives banks more money to lend, which makes interest rates go down. Selling the securities back to the banks reduces the money available for lending, which makes interest rates go up. If you look at the weekly H4 reports going back to the summer of 2007, you start to notice something alarming. At the start of the credit crunch, around August of that year, you see the Fed buying a few more Repos than usual — $33 billion or so. By November, as private-bank reserves were dwindling to alarmingly low levels, the Fed started injecting even more cash than usual into the economy: $48 billion. By late December, the number was up to $58 billion; by the following March, around the time of the Bear Stearns rescue, the Repo number had jumped to $77 billion. In the week of May 1st, 2008, the number was $115 billion — “out of control now,” according to one congressional aide. For the rest of 2008, the numbers remained similarly in the stratosphere, the Fed pumping as much as $125 billion of these short-term loans into the economy — until suddenly, at the start of this year, the number drops to nothing. Zero. The reason the number has dropped to nothing is that the Fed had simply stopped using relatively transparent devices like repurchase agreements to pump its money into the hands of private companies. By early 2009, a whole series of new government operations had been invented to inject cash into the economy, most all of them completely secretive and with names you’ve never heard of. There is the Term Auction Facility, the Term Securities Lending Facility, the Primary Dealer Credit Facility, the Commercial Paper Funding Facility and a monster called the Asset-Backed Commercial Paper Money Market Mutual Fund Liquidity Facility (boasting the chat-room horror-show acronym ABCPMMMFLF). For good measure, there’s also something called a Money Market Investor Funding Facility, plus three facilities called Maiden Lane I, II and III to aid bailout recipients like Bear Stearns and AIG.

     While the rest of America, and most of Congress, have been bugging out about the $700 billion bailout program called TARP, all of these newly created organisms in the Federal Reserve zoo have quietly been pumping not billions but trillions of dollars into the hands of private companies (at least $3 trillion so far in loans, with as much as $5.7 trillion more in guarantees of private investments). Although this technically isn’t taxpayer money, it still affects taxpayers directly, because the activities of the Fed impact the economy as a whole. And this new, secretive activity by the Fed completely eclipses the TARP program in terms of its influence on the economy.

     No one knows who’s getting that money or exactly how much of it is disappearing through these new holes in the hull of America’s credit rating. Moreover, no one can really be sure if these new institutions are even temporary at all — or whether they are being set up as permanent, state-aided crutches to Wall Street, designed to systematically suck bad investments off the ledgers of irresponsible lenders. “They’re supposed to be temporary,” says Paul-Martin Foss, an aide to Rep. Ron Paul. “But we keep getting notices every six months or so that they’re being renewed. They just sort of quietly announce it.”

     None other than disgraced senator Ted Stevens was the poor sap who made the unpleasant discovery that if Congress didn’t like the Fed handing trillions of dollars to banks without any oversight, Congress could apparently go fuck itself — or so said the law. When Stevens asked the GAO about what authority Congress has to monitor the Fed, he got back a letter citing an obscure statute that nobody had ever heard of before: the Accounting and Auditing Act of 1950. The relevant section, 31 USC 714(b), dictated that congressional audits of the Federal Reserve may not include “deliberations, decisions and actions on monetary policy matters.” The exemption, as Foss notes, “basically includes everything.” According to the law, in other words, the Fed simply cannot be audited by Congress. Or by anyone else, for that matter.

VI. WINNERS AND LOSERS

     Stevens isn’t the only person in Congress to be given the finger by the Fed. In January, when Rep. Alan Grayson of Florida asked Federal Reserve vice chairman Donald Kohn where all the money went — only $1.2 trillion had vanished by then — Kohn gave Grayson a classic eye roll, saying he would be “very hesitant” to name names because it might discourage banks from taking the money.

“Has that ever happened?” Grayson asked. “Have people ever said, ‘We will not take your $100 billion because people will find out about it?’”

“Well, we said we would not publish the names of the borrowers, so we have no test of that,” Kohn answered, visibly annoyed with Grayson’s meddling. Grayson pressed on, demanding to know on what terms the Fed was lending the money. Presumably it was buying assets and making loans, but no one knew how it was pricing those assets — in other words, no one knew what kind of deal it was striking on behalf of taxpayers. So when Grayson asked if the purchased assets were “marked to market” — a methodology that assigns a concrete value to assets, based on the market rate on the day they are traded — Kohn answered, mysteriously, “The ones that have market values are marked to market.” The implication was that the Fed was purchasing derivatives like credit swaps or other instruments that were basically impossible to value objectively — paying real money for God knows what.

“Well, how much of them don’t have market values?” asked Grayson. “How much of them are worthless?” “None are worthless,” Kohn snapped. “Then why don’t you mark them to market?” Grayson demanded. “Well,” Kohn sighed, “we are marking the ones to market that have market values.”

     In essence, the Fed was telling Congress to lay off and let the experts handle things. “It’s like buying a car in a used-car lot without opening the hood, and saying, ‘I think it’s fine,’” says Dan Fuss, an analyst with the investment firm Loomis Sayles. “The salesman says, ‘Don’t worry about it. Trust me.’ It’ll probably get us out of the lot, but how much farther? None of us knows.”

      When one considers the comparatively extensive system of congressional checks and balances that goes into the spending of every dollar in the budget via the normal appropriations process, what’s happening in the Fed amounts to something truly revolutionary — a kind of shadow government with a budget many times the size of the normal federal outlay, administered dictatorially by one man, Fed chairman Ben Bernanke. “We spend hours and hours and hours arguing over $10 million amendments on the floor of the Senate, but there has been no discussion about who has been receiving this $3 trillion,” says Sen. Bernie Sanders. “It is beyond comprehension.”

     Count Sanders among those who don’t buy the argument that Wall Street firms shouldn’t have to face being outed as recipients of public funds, that making this information public might cause investors to panic and dump their holdings in these firms. “I guess if we made that public, they’d go on strike or something,” he muses. And the Fed isn’t the only arm of the bailout that has closed ranks. The Treasury, too, has maintained incredible secrecy surrounding its implementation even of the TARP program, which was mandated by Congress. To this date, no one knows exactly what criteria the Treasury Department used to determine which banks received bailout funds and which didn’t — particularly the first $350 billion given out under Bush appointee Hank Paulson.

     The situation with the first TARP payments grew so absurd that when the Congressional Oversight Panel, charged with monitoring the bailout money, sent a query to Paulson asking how he decided whom to give money to, Treasury responded — and this isn’t a joke — by directing the panel to a copy of the TARP application form on its website. Elizabeth Warren, the chair of the Congressional Oversight Panel, was struck nearly speechless by the response.

“Do you believe that?” she says incredulously. “That’s not what we had in mind.” Another member of Congress, who asked not to be named, offers his own theory about the TARP process. “I think basically if you knew Hank Paulson, you got the money,” he says.

     This cozy arrangement created yet another opportunity for big banks to devour market share at the expense of smaller regional lenders. While all the bigwigs at Citi and Goldman and Bank of America who had Paulson on speed-dial got bailed out right away — remember that TARP was originally passed because money had to be lent right now, that day, that minute, to stave off emergency — many small banks are still waiting for help. Five months into the TARP program, some not only haven’t received any funds, they haven’t even gotten a call back about their applications.

     “There’s definitely a feeling among community bankers that no one up there cares much if they make it or not,” says Tanya Wheeless, president of the Arizona Bankers Association. Which, of course, is exactly the opposite of what should be happening, since small, regional banks are far less guilty of the kinds of predatory lending that sank the economy. “They’re not giving out subprime loans or easy credit,” says Wheeless. “At the community level, it’s much more bread-and-butter banking.” Nonetheless, the lion’s share of the bailout money has gone to the larger, so-called “systemically important” banks. “It’s like Treasury is picking winners and losers,” says one state banking official who asked not to be identified. This itself is a hugely important political development. In essence, the bailout accelerated the decline of regional community lenders by boosting the political power of their giant national competitors. Which, when you think about it, is insane: What had brought us to the brink of collapse in the first place was this relentless instinct for building ever-larger megacompanies, passing deregulatory measures to gradually feed all the little fish in the sea to an ever-shrinking pool of Bigger Fish. To fix this problem, the government should have slowly liquidated these monster, too-big-to-fail firms and broken them down to smaller, more manageable companies. Instead, federal regulators closed ranks and used an almost completely secret bailout process to double down on the same faulty, merger-happy thinking that got us here in the first place, creating a constellation of megafirms under government control that are even bigger, more unwieldy and more crammed to the gills with systemic risk.

     In essence, Paulson and his cronies turned the federal government into one gigantic, half-opaque holding company, one whose balance sheet includes the world’s most appallingly large and risky hedge fund, a controlling stake in a dying insurance giant, huge investments in a group of teetering megabanks, and shares here and there in various auto-finance companies, student loans, and other failing businesses. Like AIG, this new federal holding company is a firm that has no mechanism for auditing itself and is run by leaders who have very little grasp of the daily operations of its disparate subsidiary operations.

     In other words, it’s AIG’s rip-roaringly shitty business model writ almost inconceivably massive — to echo Geithner, a huge, complex global company attached to a very complicated investment bank/hedge fund that’s been allowed to build up without adult supervision. How much of what kinds of crap is actually on our balance sheet, and what did we pay for it? When exactly will the rent come due, when will the money run out? Does anyone know what the hell is going on? And on the linear spectrum of capitalism to socialism, where exactly are we now? Is there a dictionary word that even describes what we are now? It would be funny, if it weren’t such a nightmare.

VII. YOU DON’T GET IT

     The real question from here is whether the Obama administration is going to move to bring the financial system back to a place where sanity is restored and the general public can have a say in things or whether the new financial bureaucracy will remain obscure, secretive and hopelessly complex. It might not bode well that Geithner, Obama’s Treasury secretary, is one of the architects of the Paulson bailouts; as chief of the New York Fed, he helped orchestrate the Goldman-friendly AIG bailout and the secretive Maiden Lane facilities used to funnel funds to the dying company. Neither did it look good when Geithner — himself a protégé of notorious Goldman alum John Thain, the Merrill Lynch chief who paid out billions in bonuses after the state spent billions bailing out his firm — picked a former Goldman lobbyist named Mark Patterson to be his top aide. In fact, most of Geithner’s early moves reek strongly of Paulsonism. He has continually talked about partnering with private investors to create a so-called “bad bank” that would systemically relieve private lenders of bad assets — the kind of massive, opaque, quasi-private bureaucratic nightmare that Paulson specialized in. Geithner even refloated a Paulson proposal to use TALF, one of the Fed’s new facilities, to essentially lend cheap money to hedge funds to invest in troubled banks while practically guaranteeing them enormous profits.

     God knows exactly what this does for the taxpayer, but hedge-fund managers sure love the idea. “This is exactly what the financial system needs,” said Andrew Feldstein, CEO of Blue Mountain Capital and one of the Morgan Mafia. Strangely, there aren’t many people who don’t run hedge funds who have expressed anything like that kind of enthusiasm for Geithner’s ideas.

     As complex as all the finances are, the politics aren’t hard to follow. By creating an urgent crisis that can only be solved by those fluent in a language too complex for ordinary people to understand, the Wall Street crowd has turned the vast majority of Americans into non-participants in their own political future. There is a reason it used to be a crime in the Confederate states to teach a slave to read: Literacy is power. In the age of the CDS and CDO, most of us are financial illiterates. By making an already too-complex economy even more complex, Wall Street has used the crisis to effect a historic, revolutionary change in our political system — transforming a democracy into a two-tiered state, one with plugged-in financial bureaucrats above and clueless customers below.

     The most galling thing about this financial crisis is that so many Wall Street types think they actually deserve not only their huge bonuses and lavish lifestyles but the awesome political power their own mistakes have left them in possession of. When challenged, they talk about how hard they work, the 90-hour weeks, the stress, the failed marriages, the hemorrhoids and gallstones they all get before they hit 40. “But wait a minute,” you say to them. “No one ever asked you to stay up all night eight days a week trying to get filthy rich shorting what’s left of the American auto industry or selling $600 billion in toxic, irredeemable mortgages to ex-strippers on work release and Taco Bell clerks. Actually, come to think of it, why are we even giving taxpayer money to you people? Why are we not throwing your ass in jail instead?” But before you even finish saying that, they’re rolling their eyes, because You Don’t Get It. These people were never about anything except turning money into money, in order to get more money; valueswise they’re on par with crack addicts, or obsessive sexual deviants who burgle homes to steal panties. Yet these are the people in whose hands our entire political future now rests.

Good luck with that, America. And enjoy tax season.

[From Issue 1075 — April 2, 2009]

Editor’s Rant!

First of all GREAT STORY and BRAVO, BRAVO, BRAVO!!!… AIR THESE PUNKS OUT FOR REAL!!! WHY ISN’T THIS SHIT FRONT AND CENTER?!!!

AND TO THINK THAT GRAMM WAS McCAIN’S FINANCIAL CONSULTANT… WOW… WE ALMOST GOT PLOWED… HEY WAIT… WE’RE GETTING PLOWED…! FREEKING AIG, MORGAN STANLEY, CITICORP, GOLDMAN SACHS, FEDERAL RESERVE, WASHINGTON FILTHY TRAITOROUS PUNKS!

AIR ‘EM OUT BABY…. NAME NAMES! PAY UP SUCKA!

WITH TIME BEHIND BARS BABY…

The global economic crisis isn’t about money – it’s about power. How Wall Street insiders are using the bailout to stage a revolution.”

So, this thing is about the filthy rich becoming even more filthy rich and fommenting their own revolution [first]?!

First of all let’s talk about insurance companies shall we. The only TRILLION DOLLAR INDUSTRY IN THE U.S. that is NOT REGULATED! NOT REGULATED, NOT REGULATED! INSURANCE IS A SCAM… WHOLE LIFE, for example is a life insurance product that is designed to collapse intentionally and literally rob you of your life savings… THINK NOT?! When was the last time you heard of someone… ANYONE retiring on their whole life policy? Yet that is the million dollar promise they sold you on right?! Annual renewable Term Life is bought on you and which who’s cost premium goes up each year like a ladder. The “savings” portion you think you have in accumulations are paltry and don’t accumulate to much if anything. The costs however of doing business, which is the annual renewable term ins. They buy on your policy to hedge their exposure on insuring you, eventually cuts into the “Savings” accumulation of your policy in the form of “operating expenses” and “Fees”. So, between these annually increasing operating expenses, their office expenses and their commisions… the saddest thing is that you will eventually get a letter around 70 years old and it will say something like, sorry to inform you but due to the exhausting of the benefit from your savings component in your whole life policy, we are regrettably informing you that you’ll need to increase your payment to us in order to merely keep the “DEATH BENEFIT” active… That’s right… The entire lifetime of savings was wiped out and the small face value is now in jeopardy of being enforcable! Even worse those “PAID UP” policies… They’ll tank the same way… SCAM ARTISTS CRIMINALS and THEIVES! I know because I confronted many an insurance salesman in my friends homes and asked them to defend their product in front of their clients, when I actually read the insurance policy out loud to my friends and provided a computer run of exactly when their Whole Life or Annuity comingled life insurance product would tank out on them… I was part of an ARMY of people that did this back in the early 90’s called A.L. Williams… We Offered sound financial planning of  buying term life insurance (no gimmick) and invest the difference in a mutual fund through dollar cost averaging investing. Real returns on investments were largely 15 -20 % for real! Actual investments were compouding every 6 years (rule of 72 @ 12% simple interest) I couldn’t believe what I saw when the first Prudential agent ran out of the house and refused to defend himself or his product or his company nor his industry! My friend Jimmy and his wife were in tears and were left with the reality that they were had for the past 15 years… The good thing was at least I got them out of the trash they were in and doubled there face value Life Ins. and saved them a bundle for investment into there own Mutual Fund, of which I trained them to make a monthly investment every month on the same day, for the amount I saved them on the trash-value life insurance they had from Prudential Life… Simple and real.

These “INSURANCE PEOPLE” and “Financiers” should be in PRISON! “Brilliant minds” ?!! Are you freeking serious?! how maligned do you need to be to get the fact that you bums are playing freeking JENGA STICKS with our retirements and our entire economic society? maybe you thought you could just hot potatoe the interest and “step on” the financial product… To “Cut it” like a Cocaine dealer cuts his blow with nasty vitamine B, inositol, or whatever you can find… Bottom ‘line’ is that eventually the “Blow” has no GO and all you get is a stuffed up nose and a snotty headache and pissed off for getting ripped off… No value in that and your all PUNKS and traitors… enjoy your entitled Mc Mansions, BMW’s, freeking Cigar clubs, expensive shit water cologne and the $15,000.00 fucking stellar — metorite Goddam wrist watch you got on… Pally.

I digress… but not really. These are criminals, thuggs, bums shit sticks, plastic sandwich people. They would and have sold their own Mother’s many times over and selling out on you or me and our country… HA! you gotta be kidding me… We’re a speed bump to this ilke. LOOK.. WE ACTUALLY LISTEN TO KARL ROVE! HE’S A FREEKING FUGITIVE AND A TRAITOR!!! Somehow, we’ve been conditioned that we don’t really count… I think that CONGRESS and THE SENATE and the GOVERNORS and THE MAYORS and THE ALDERMAN, Basically POLITICIANS are shady. Today more so than ever though… A right wing mantra of butt buddieisms is largely to blame THANKS BUSH! Nepotism, gives rite of way to entitlement and entitlement leads to being more entitled and more nepotistic and the ILKE grows… LIKE A BEAST. INSURANCE GIANTS should never have been permitted to expose US to THEIR risks!!! GOD DAMMIT.

FEDERAL RESERVE?! IS NEITHER! SCREW THEM TOO WHILE WE’RE AT IT! AND YEAH… WHERE’S OSAMA, You know BUSH’s OLD BUSINESS PARTNER!!!

WTF?!

Let’s beat these scum to the punch, OUR REVOLUTION’S COMING FIRST PUNKS! YOU HAD YOUR WAY… NOW WE’RE GONNA HAVE OURS!

Categories: ALL OF THE ABOVE! · AM-BUSHED! · HERO'S & ZERO'S · INSIDE JOB · JON STEWART HERO! · LIES · PLASTIC SANDWICH · PROPOGANDA · SHAMWOW! · TAKIN' THE 5TH! · TRUTH · WHERE'S OSAMA!
Tagged: , , , , , , , , , , ,

“Rantin’ Rick” Santelli for President?

March 21, 2009 · 1 Comment

THE CHICAGO TEA PARTY

When CNBC’s Rick Santelli stood up and delivered these passionate remarks on the floor of the Chicago Mercantile Exchange a little over a month ago, he not only gave voice to the frustrations of millions of angry Americans, he also delivered what many are now calling the “rant of the year.” An instant classic. Pure gold.

It was a rare moment in broadcast news, taking all the other CNBC anchors off guard and prompting them to label Rick Santelli some kind of “new revolutionary leader.” (Then, of course, they quickly cut to commercial and shut him up!)

We’d have to agree that Santelli nailed it, though. He said in frank, plain English the words all the economic “experts” are afraid to say: we’re screwed if we don’t stop this madness now!

Wall Street? Washington? President Obama? Congress? Are you listening? Yoo-hoo….anybody home?

Apparently, President Obama was listening – Santelli’s comments drew a swift and hard rebuke from White House Secretary Robert Gibbs the next day. In turn, Santelli responded with a personal letter to the American people, which was posted on CNBC’s website. Here’s an excerpt:

“If one doesn’t agree with my opinions….I can respect that. It is very American to disagree. It is very UN-American to belittle or ignore the FACTS, freedom of the press, freedom of speech, or the voices of millions of Americans that demand better answers, more transparency, deeper accountability, and the simple idea that our elected officials represent all Americans. All Americans should be treated fairly and equitably as our government puts forth solutions. Mr. Gibbs, the President’s Press Secretary, said I did not read the Presidents Mortgage Plan; for the record, I did read the plan and listened to it live as President Obama was presenting it. Anyone who knows me or views CNBC regularly is keenly aware of the fact that I am exceedingly thorough in my homework.” 

 

Watch this amazing video and dont’cha have to wonder…Rick Santelli for president in 2012?

And if you’d like some fries with your daily dose of economic hypocrisy, check this one out as well (especially if you think CNBC’s Jim Cramer is the most annoying person on earth):

Oh, and don’t foret – Santelli was one of the few economic reporters who tried to warn us six months ago (when the first $700 billion bailout package was passed) what the fallout would be. Unfortunately, his warning fell on deaf ears, forcing him to walk off camera in anger…

(Hint: the best part is at around 6:20)

Y’know, Santelli says the last place he would ever be caught dead is in D.C. – but just incase he should change his mind four years from now, I think this guy might just get my vote.

So, who else out there is inclined to be a part of “Righteous Rick’s Revolution?”

Categories: ALL OF THE ABOVE! · HERO'S & ZERO'S · LIES · PROPOGANDA · TRUTH · Uncategorized
Tagged: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

Time To Throw The Crooks Out of Washington Yet?

March 13, 2009 · 3 Comments

It’s the same ol thing out of Washington we see,
Our elected officials doing as they please.

We voted them in, they gave us an oath,
Democrats and Republicans shame on them both.

They want us to think that THEY know what’s best,
The gall to believe they are better than the rest…

…Of us working Americans who suffer and sweat,
While they contrive, deceive, and forget…….

…That WE gave them their jobs and WE can take them away,
And that’s exactly what should happen the next election day.

EVERY INCUMBENT WITHOUT ANY EXCEPTIONS,
Should be voted out of office, that’ll get their attention.

THEY WORK FOR US, not the other way around,
And we keep cleaning house till the right people are found.

We’re tired of the lies and their back door deals,
That line their pockets and are never revealed.

So the next election lets put an end to their crap,
Boot em ALL OUT of office and start over from scratch!

 

(This little ditty comes to us from our friends at http://WhoShivsAGit.com -sign up and join the discussion!)

Categories: ALL OF THE ABOVE! · AM-BUSHED! · HERO'S & ZERO'S · INSIDE JOB · KARL ROVE · LIES · TRUTH · WHERE'S OSAMA!
Tagged: , ,

Susan Lindauer: Secret Charges and The Patriot Act

March 11, 2009 · 3 Comments

Susan Lindauer: Secret Charges and The Patriot Act

Tuesday, 10 March 2009, 5:12 pm
Article: Michael Collins

Former Accused Iraqi Agent Susan Lindauer, Secret Charges and The Patriot Act in Action

bushcoup3

Renegate98 cc

Susan Lindauer Interviewed by Michael Collins

“Voice or no voice, the people can always be brought to the bidding of the leaders. That is easy. All you have to do is to tell them they are being attacked, and denounce the pacifists for lack of patriotism and exposing the country to danger. It works the same in any country.”  Herman Goering, Interview at Nuremburg Trials, April 14, 1946

“The Patriot Act was used against me in total contradiction to its stated purpose. Or perhaps it was the most logical use of the law, since it establishes a legal framework to crush free thinking and interrupt individual questioning of the government. It is the beginning of all dictatorship in America.” Susan Lindauer, March 9, 2009

By Michael Collins

In March, 2004 Susan Lindauer was arrested for allegedly acting as an “unregistered agent” for prewar Iraq. She challenged the government’s assertion and sought the right to prove at Trial that she’d been a United States intelligence asset covering Iraq and Libya from the early 1990’s through 2003 (see articles).

In an unprecedented judicial ploy that lasted five years, federal prosecutors blocked Ms. Lindauer’s rights to trial or any other sort of evidentiary hearings that would test her story. For 11 months, she was confined at Carswell federal prison on a Texas military base and at the Metropolitan Correctional Center in Manhattan, without a conviction or plea bargain.

During the indictment, she was conveniently gagged from sharing her direct knowledge of Iraqi Pre-War Intelligence, which she gained as a primary asset covering the Iraqi Embassy at the United Nations from August, 1996 onwards. She was also silenced from talking about the advance warning she gave the Office of Counter-Terrorism and U.S. Attorney General John Ashcroft’s private staff in August, 2001, about possible airplane hijackings and a reprise of the 1993 World Trade Center attack.

But there was more than the Sixth Amendment’s “right to a speedy trial” at stake.

Lindauer was one of the first citizens charged under special judicial provisions of the Patriot Act. The exceedingly complex legislation, emerged from the desk of John Yoo just days after the 9/11 attack. It passed the House 357 to 66 and the Senate 98 to 1. The Patriot Act eviscerated long standing Constitutional protections. It fundamentally altered how trials are conducted whenever provisions of the act are invoked in a court of law.

Lindauer’s indictment was the one of the first test drives of the Patriot Act for the Bush-Cheney Department of Justice. Her nightmare officially ended five days before the Obama Inauguration, when the prosecution dropped the case “in the interests of justice.”

In the current interviews, Susan Lindauer explains how the Patriot Act was used to quash her most fundamental rights of due process, which would otherwise have empowered her to repudiate the indictment and protect her reputation.

United States Department of Justice Criminal Resource Manual (Classified Information Procedures Act and FISA) Summary and original source “Secret Evidence is Slowly Eroding the Adversary System: CIPA and FISA in the Courts.”

Ellen Yaroshefsky, Benjamin N. Cardozo School of Law Summary and original source Susan Lindauer Interviews by Michael Collins

Michael Collins: Not many people know that you were arrested under provisions of the Patriot Act. You were one of the fist U.S. citizens to experience the brutality of this legislation. How did it shape your case and treatment in the Courts?
Susan Lindauer: That’s right. Along with Jose Padilla, I will go down in history as one of the first and only non-Arab Americans ever indicted on the Patriot Act during the Bush Administration.

I believe that my case demonstrates why the Patriot Act should be repealed immediately to safeguard our country and our freedom.

I have always opposed war and advocated diplomacy to solve conflicts. The indictment accused me of “acting as an unregistered Iraqi Agent,” on the grounds that I delivered a letter forecasting the failure of the Occupation to my cousin, Andy Card, Chief of Staff to President George Bush. That’s what used to be known as Freedom of Speech. The letter was not hostile or threatening. In fact, it proved tragically accurate. That did not matter to the Justice Department. Vocalizing opposition to Bush policy was treasonous. End of discussion.
Collins: What happened when you got to court?
Lindauer: Once I got to Court, I discovered that the indictment also contained two “secret charges,” gratis of the Patriot Act. My attorney and I were given the dates for the two allegations, saying that I attended meetings with Iraqi officials in October, 1999 and October, 2001, but nothing more to explain what I had allegedly done wrong.
There was nothing unusual about the fact that those meetings had occurred. I visited the Iraqi Embassy at the United Nations about every three weeks for 7 years. My handlers were fully informed, which explains how the government could have been tracking the dates in the first place. They got the dates from me.

“a. On or about October 14, 1999, Susan Lindauer — met with an officer of the Iraq Intelligence Service (“IIS”) in Manhattan.
“c. In or about October 2001, SUSAN LINDAUER — accepted a task given to her in Manhattan by an officer of the IIS.” USA v. Lindauer. S2 03 Cr. 807 (MBM)

No, the government was claiming that something unusual took place during those specific meetings. Under the Patriot Act, the Prosecution was not required to tell us what those offensive actions were. Nor was the Court allowed to tell us what type of laws might have been violated by those actions.We were only told that conviction on either of the “secret charges” would get me five years in federal prison.
Collins: Please help readers understand more about “secret evidence.” Were you and your lawyer denied access to evidence, because it was considered “secret” or “classified”? How did this work under the Patriot Act?
Lindauer: It’s unbelievable, isn’t it? As if “secret charges” were not terrible enough, there was also “secret evidence” which could be applied to those “secret charges.”

The Prosecution had the right to ask a jury to convict me of those two undisclosed charges without revealing a shred of evidence to support the charges whatsoever. The Patriot Act authorized the prosecutor to ask a jury to “take it on faith” that some unspecified evidence would prove that some unspecified law had been broken.

If a judge so instructed before deliberations, the jury could be required to ignore the lack of presentation of evidence in weighing whether to convict me. The Judge could simply instruct a jury that the Justice Department regarded the evidence as “sufficient” to constitute a crime and that would be “sufficient knowledge” for their review. That kind of instruction practically requires a jury to convict a defendant.

The fundamental question of “guilty beyond reasonable doubt” is shattered. To say the least, it drastically undercuts protections in the jury system of the United States.

Conversely, evidence that might exonerate me, and prove my innocence, could be considered “secret and classified” as well. My attorney and I could be prohibited from knowing of its existence or using it in my defense. Even if that evidence or witness statements tossed out the whole case, and saved me from years in prison, I would not be entitled to know of its existence or present it to the jury.

Collins: This sounds like Franz Kafka’s “The Trial” combined with the Queen of Hearts in “Alice in Wonderland.” How did you conceptualize your experience at the time?
Lindauer: The outstanding blog, Welcome Back to Pottersville published a headline that I loved: Franz Kafka, Meet Susan Lindauer. Oh yes, I was floored. I know the Constitution. I cherish it, in fact. I could not believe such a thing would happen to somebody like me, with my education from Smith College and the London School of Economics, and all of my community resources. I mean, if the government could do this to somebody like me, what could they do to somebody who has nothing? It’s a frightening thought.

Above all, I despised the Assistant US Attorney, Edward O’Callaghan, who prosecuted my case. Numerous times I correctly told the Court that the FBI had verified my story and Mr. O’Callaghan was falsifying his claims about the availability of witnesses to authenticate my story. He flat out lied about my identity and activities to a senior federal judge. I mean, come on. We interviewed those witnesses, too. We know what they told the FBI.

And so I kept challenging the Court that nobody had to take my word for anything. I challenged the Court to subpoena the witnesses and question them directly under oath. For FIVE YEARS, I told the Court that all questions could be cleared up in ten minutes, with a simple pre-trial evidentiary hearing.

(Part three of this interview focuses on that issue.)
Collins: Back to the “secrecy rules,” How did those work in trial preparation?
Lindauer: Within the category of “secret evidence,” the law pretends to establish a safeguard for defendants by allowing two levels of secrecy.

Under the main category of secrecy, both the attorney and defendant are prohibited from laying eyes on evidence or witness statements. The Prosecutor always retains the right to deny access on the grounds of national security.

A sub-section of the Patriot Act allows the defense attorney to petition the government for a security clearance in order to review some parts of the “secret evidence.” In reality, the process drags out for many months, while most defendants languish in prison waiting for trial. (And because the case involves the Patriot Act, they’re frequently detained in solitary confinement.) Getting clearance can take six months to a year, costing the Defense valuable time to review the evidence or plan a rebuttal.

A security clearance does not automatically guarantee access to evidence, however. Depending on their backgrounds, different attorneys qualify for different levels of security clearances. For example, an activist attorney with a history of pro bono cases involving the ACLU or something equally subversive, like Greenpeace, might qualify for a very low security clearance, because their career choices and previous cases might be perceived to threaten the State. So one attorney might have more or less access to secret evidence than another. But you can’t know until the security clearance review is completed.

Hope is vain, however. That safeguard is mostly irrelevant and procedural. To illustrate that point, in five years under indictment, I had two separate attorneys with very different levels of security clearances, including a former federal prosecutor, the outstanding Mr. Brian Shaughnessy of Washington, DC, who regularly handles the most high level and complicated security cases. Neither attorney was ever able to determine what those two “secret charges” were. Neither attorney ever saw the “secret evidence.” More disturbingly, the attorney is strictly prohibited from revealing any part of that “secret evidence” to the Defendant. The Defendant cannot see it or know about it, and therefore cannot provide an effective response to the attorney to rebut it. Thus, ironically, the Patriot Act handicaps the defendant’s ability to assist in the preparation of their Defense strategy. Thus, it renders the Defendant INCOMPETENT TO STAND TRIAL.

Ah, the plot thickens.
Collins: It does in a very major way. What actions could be so serious as to deny your constitutional rights? Did you ever figure out what those “secret charges” might have been? Surely you know what you were doing in October, 1999 and October, 2001.
Lindauer: Oh yeah. And I’ll bet your readers think those accusations must be very serious! Wouldn’t you think? I must have done something far too horrible for the government to whisper aloud! Wanna bet? In five years, we could only guess about those two charges. We surmised that in October 1999, I was indicted for blocking the Iraqi Government in Baghdad from making financial campaign contributions to the George W. Bush Presidential Campaign.
That’s right. With immediate assistance from my U.S. Intelligence contacts, I stopped Iraq from making illegal campaign contributions to the 2000 Bush Election campaign–at least through my channels.

We have speculated that perhaps Saddam gave money to the Bush Campaign in 2000 through somebody else and some other channel. And the Republicans don’t want anybody to know about it. Perhaps I was indicted to stop the Democrats from investigating campaign contribution records.

Consider that Andy Card was warned of Iraq’s attempts in two progress reports on March 1, 2001 and December 2, 2001. The Republican leadership that attacked me was very much aware that this question of illegal campaign contributions was hanging out there. And I was indicted for stopping it from happening.
Collins: What about the second “secret charge”?

Lindauer: That was allegedly in October, 2001. We’re still in the dark on that one; however, we think it involves my efforts to collect health statistics from Baghdad regarding depleted uranium left behind by the United States in the first Gulf War.

Depleted Uranium has resulted in a spike in Iraqi birth defects and cancer rates from long-term exposure. They say Iraqi children suffer cancer “like the flu,” it’s so common.

Tragically, exposure to depleted uranium might seriously harm American soldiers and their future unborn children, too! I suspect it will become a major health risk for soldiers who return from repeated tours of duty in Iraq. When they start having families back home, we’re going to hear about this.

That’s probably all it took to categorize the documents as “secret evidence” and “secret charges.” They didn’t want my case to raise the profile of that health risk for Americans in Iraq. None of that health information was ever returned to me in discovery.

For knowing something so unpleasant about the government’s responsibilities, the Justice Department actually wanted me to serve five years in prison. It’s unbelievable.

Collins: It must have been terrifying. The government figuratively tied you to a chair and challenged you to a 15 round boxing match. Did you ever consider pleading guilty to stop the beating?
Lindauer: Never! I’m a helluva boxer myself, Mike! They must have been surprised to find I could go 15 rounds. I’m strong and tenacious to this day! No, I had my entire legal strategy mapped out in the first couple of hours after my arrest. I could see mistakes in the indictment, and I quickly identified which witnesses and evidence would be necessary to repudiate the whole lot.

My witness list was outstanding. It included international attorneys from the Lockerbie Trial, former Congressional staffers, even a couple of international journalists. One of Scotland’s finest Solicitors, Edward MacKechnie, who won acquittal for his Libyan client in the Lockerbie Trial, immediately promised to travel at his own expense to testify for me as to the identity and credentials of Dr. Richard Fuisz, my CIA handler. I have the emails to prove it. His participation was beyond dispute.

There was no question that I had an outstanding defense. What’s more, I have outstanding bona fides to go with it. I took perverse satisfaction in knowing that once the jury received witness corroboration of my extensive credentials dealing with Libya and Iraq, Yemen, Egypt, Syria/Hezbollah and Malaysia for 9 years from 1993 to 2002, they would be appalled by the prosecution’s arguments to convict me.

Any jury would recognize that I had legitimate reason for participating in the 9/11 investigation as a “first-responder,” not to mention that I’m one of the few individuals who openly warned about 9/11 for several months before the attack. I still think a New York jury would have applauded me.

The public just didn’t know who I was– yet– or the extensive work that put me on the cutting edge of anti-terrorism for so many years. That would change with witness testimony at trial. It would not be boring.

Collins: What was your reaction to getting arrested in March, 2004?
Lindauer:I was disgusted and perversely amused. At my home, while FBI agents were handcuffing me, I asked what I was charged with. That’s a natural question when FBI agents come pounding on your door. They wouldn’t tell me. That’s the Patriot Act for you. The arresting FBI agent said that I could read the indictment when I got to Baltimore– Not Washington D.C. or Greenbelt, Maryland, which are 15 minutes from my home. They processed me in Baltimore, a city that’s 45 minutes away and out of the sphere of Washington media. All through the drive, the FBI agent only told me that I would be extradited to New York. I had no idea why I’d been arrested at all.

When I finally got to read the indictment, I was purple with outrage. After 9 years of hard work and devotion to Anti-Terrorism as an Asset for the U.S. government, I was now accused of acting as an “unregistered Iraqi agent” and “conspiracy with the Iraqi Intelligence Service.” Oh My!

I told the arresting FBI agent, “This is bullshit. This is political. You want me out of the way so you can lie about Iraq and 9/11 during the (2004) election.

Collins: You were arrested in March 2004, when President Bush was locked in a tight race with John Kerry and appeared to be losing. Do you think presidential campaign politics was involved in your indictment?
Lindauer: There was never any question that it was a cheap, political indictment engineered by ruthless White House staff, including my own cousin, Andy Card, afraid of losing Bush’s re-election.

Lindauer:A few weeks before my arrest, I contacted the offices of Senators Trent Lott and John McCain and asked to testify before the new blue-ribbon Presidential Commission on Iraqi Pre-War Intelligence. As part of that testimony, I would have detailed Iraq’s efforts to cooperate with the 9/11 investigation, and, before 9/11, our threats to bomb Baghdad in April and May, 2001 if they failed to serve up any fragments of intelligence relating to a new conspiracy involving airplane hijackings. I, personally, bickered with Iraqi diplomats at the United Nations for several months seeking that information. Iraq had nothing to give us. Under the circumstances, arresting me must have presented an irresistible temptation.
Collins: How so?
Lindauer: They saw that I would be sidelined in legal wrangling until after the November election. I would be gagged from telling the full and accurate story of Iraqi Pre-War Intelligence and the government’s advance warnings of a 9/11 style attack. This gave Republicans a significant advantage over the Democrats, shielding them from criticism during their campaigns.

After November, the charges against me would be declared bogus, and the case would be dismissed for lack of merit. I would ultimately win, whereas American voters would have lost an opportunity to make informed decisions about which candidates to support. They would be flying blind just the way politicians wanted.

Collins: What was some of the most devastating information that you would have shared?
Lindauer: Imagine if American voters had known that the 9/11 strike was not a surprise to U.S. Intelligence! Would it have changed any votes if Americans had known the truth? That throughout the summer of 2001, there were extensive discussions about possible airplane hijackings and a reprise of the 1993 World Trade Center attack, specifically?

In August 2001, we thought the attack was “imminent.” At the instruction of my CIA handler, Dr. Richard Fuisz, I personally alerted the private staff of U.S. Attorney General John Ashcroft and the Office of Counter-Terrorism at the Justice Department about our fears, asking for their cooperation in issuing an emergency alert throughout all agencies for any fragment of intelligence or suspicious activity that might help us pre-empt a conspiracy to hijack and/or bomb airplanes. Would any of that have made a difference in the voting booth? Would Americans still think the “War on Terror” was a success? That’s the kind of wild card that campaign staff hate during a tight election.
Collins: Do you have any parting words on the Patriot Act?
Lindauer: It strikes me as ironic that the Patriot Act, which Congress passed after 9/11 to empower law enforcement to hunt down terror suspects, was first used to suppress and punish an American citizen who spent a life-time opposing violence in terrorism or war, and who gave advance warning about the 9/11 attack in specific detail.

I’m obviously a very dangerous woman! My indictment provides a classic example of a fearful incumbent — a dictator — arresting his political opponents on trumped up charges so that he can remove obstacles to staying in power, and intimidates others into silence when they would otherwise speak against him.

It’s what you’d expect from Chile under Pinochet in the 1970s, the El Salvadoran juntas in the 1980s, Egypt today. It’s Myanmar and Tibet. And it’s what happened to me.

Collins: Part three of this interview explores the intense and chilling abuse Ms. Lindauer suffered when confined to the Carswell federal prison facility housed in the Carswell U.S. Air Force base near Ft. Worth Texas. At the same time, Lindauer will describe how federal law enforcement officials associated with her case manipulated proceedings and falsified reports about her life and activities.

END
Permission to reproduce in part or whole with attribution of authorship and a link to this article
Taken from internet 3/10/2009 from: http://www.scoop.co.nz/stories/HL0903/S00130.htm

Editors’ Rant:
Jack Mosel

First thing’s first… I don’t care if you’re a Democrat or Repubplican… What the hell can one say about this information being anything but absolutely astounding… If you for one minute go Joe the $8.00/hr Plumber’s assistant on me and say that this woman is a “liberal” or a crack pot… You are smoking crack and are so”with the enemy”…

So being that this article is now plastered all over the world, being that I took it (with permissions) from a digital news source in NEW ZEALAND! And seeing how The U.N. today just commented on how they are going to begin the investigations into the Bush Administration for War Crimes, as well as  in Rendition to commit Torture… This article takes the Valerie Plame instance to a ‘new’ level of  SHAMWOWERY! Or another plastic sandwich for the masses to nourish ourselves on while we continue to ignore flagrant and bonefide acts put in front of our faces for TREACHERY, TREASON and HIGH CRIMES against our country and Constitution… This hero Susan Lindauer, like Ms. Plame was manipulated, put in harms’ way, was asked to provide vital intelligence for our safety and was thrown to the granite curb on a cold day TEETH FIRST! by the Bush administration. Either because ‘they’ weren’t capable of understanding ‘intelligence’ nor were they capable of identifying it as it was piling up around them… Or more eerily… that they KNEW EXACTLY WHAT THEY WERE DOING ALL ALONG… and this hostile coup’, this fascist, dictoral takeover took place with micro-precision and a cunningness, with malice and forethought being only a term one uses to begin to describe the outrageous audacity of the obvious implications, which are imminently clear. The only parties privy to machinations consistent with carrying out these objectives, had a greater and even more devastating plan in stall for The United States of America.

ITS DEMISE, OVERTHROW, FAILURE or COLLAPSE… however, you be the judge, you take this information, like all the other hundreds now, if not thousands of MERE COICIDENCES occurring from let’s just shorten the window to 8 years and try to deny the pattern of chaos and convenient calamities from within our country. As well, let’s start out merely with the 2000 election (fraud) and the slippery slope we’ve treaded since then… and ultimately bringing us to what is building to be the greatest rip off of wealth that MODERN MAN HAS EVER SEEN! All conveiniently coincidentally occuring under the watch of the Bush/Cheney Administration… What has occured under their watch… that we know of.. is the most outragous and flagerant acts of High Crimes, Treason, Treachery that by the accounts of only what is known to the public presently, should easily account for immediate arrests and imminant prosecutions of many many officials formerly and/or presently holding offices or Military Posts today.

Call me crazy; call me “tin hat wearing guy”… OR CALL THIS AN INSIDE JOB FOR GOD’S SAKE AND LET’S REIN IN THESE TRAITORS! START WITH ROVE! WHERE THE HELL IS OSAMA?! LET’S FREAKIN’ ROLL FOR REAL!

Categories: INSIDE JOB · PLASTIC SANDWICH · SHAMWOW! · WHERE'S OSAMA!
Tagged: , , , , , , , , , , ,