Re: [POLITICS] Secretary of Treasury son lining his own pockets with taxpayer shakedown...err... bailout

[Guest guest]

I think it would be a huge savings of time, money and bureaucracy if we all

simply sent our taxes directly to Henry son and, as the draft proposal

suggests, just let him keep how much ever he wants (he's going to profit

from it either way) and give the rest to his bankster buddies.

http://tinyurl.com/3jnpfk

Conflict Of Interest? Report Says Goldman Sachs 'Among Biggest

Beneficiaries' Of son's Bailout

Think Progress

Tuesday, Sept 23, 2008

In making his push to administer the largest federal bailout of Wall Street

in history, Treasury Secretary Henry son is seeking unfettered

authority. McClatchy poses the question today, " can you trust a Wall Street

veteran with a Wall Street bailout?, " referring to son, the former CEO

of Goldman Sachs:

But the conflicts are also visible. son has surrounded himself with

former Goldman executives as he tries to navigate the domino-like collapse

of several parts of the global financial market. And others have gone off to

lead companies that could be among those that receive a bailout.

In late July, son tapped Ken , one of Goldman's most senior

executives, to join him as an adviser on what to about problems in the U.S.

and global banking sector. son's former assistant secretary,

Steel, left in July to become head of Wachovia, the Charlotte-based bank

that has hundreds of millions of troubled mortgage loans on its books.

Goldman Sachs cashed in under son, with earnings in 2005 of $5.6

billion; son made more than $38 million that year. A 2005 annual report

shows that " Goldman was still a significant player " in issuing mortgage

bonds. The conflict of interest is increasingly clear today, as Bloomberg

reports that " Goldman Sachs Group Inc. and Stanley may be among the

biggest beneficiaries " of son's bailout plan:

Goldman Sachs Group Inc. and Stanley may be among the biggest

beneficiaries of the $700 billion U.S. plan to buy assets from financial

companies while many banks see limited aid, according to Bank of America

Corp.

" Its benefits, in its current form, will be largely limited to investment

banks and other banks that have aggressively written down the value of their

holdings and have already recognized the attendant capital impairment, "

Rosenberg, Bank of America's head of credit strategy research, wrote

in a report today, without identifying particular investment banks. "

The conflict of interest provides all the more reason for the bailout

legislation in Congress to have more stringent oversight that the

administration opposes.

The Wonk Room notes six months ago, son claimed, " our banks and

investment banks, are strong. "

Suze Fisher

" Think occasionally of the suffering of which you spare yourself the sight. "

~Albert Schweitzer

[Guest guest]

I'm not even commenting because a few years ago I read a lot of the

Birch stuff about how the world is being run by bankers and now

my mind is too polluted to be able to tell fact from fiction - some

of the scariest things I've thought were fiction turned out to have

more than a grain of truth!

>

> I think it would be a huge savings of time, money and bureaucracy

if we all

> simply sent our taxes directly to Henry son and, as the draft

proposal

> suggests, just let him keep how much ever he wants (he's going to

profit

> from it either way) and give the rest to his bankster buddies.

>

>

> http://tinyurl.com/3jnpfk

> Conflict Of Interest? Report Says Goldman Sachs 'Among Biggest

> Beneficiaries' Of son's Bailout

>

> Think Progress

> Tuesday, Sept 23, 2008

>

> In making his push to administer the largest federal bailout of

Wall Street

> in history, Treasury Secretary Henry son is seeking unfettered

> authority. McClatchy poses the question today, " can you trust a

Wall Street

> veteran with a Wall Street bailout?, " referring to son, the

former CEO

> of Goldman Sachs:

>

> But the conflicts are also visible. son has surrounded himself

with

> former Goldman executives as he tries to navigate the domino-like

collapse

> of several parts of the global financial market. And others have

gone off to

> lead companies that could be among those that receive a bailout.

>

> In late July, son tapped Ken , one of Goldman's most

senior

> executives, to join him as an adviser on what to about problems in

the U.S.

> and global banking sector. son's former assistant secretary,

> Steel, left in July to become head of Wachovia, the Charlotte-based

bank

> that has hundreds of millions of troubled mortgage loans on its

books.

> Goldman Sachs cashed in under son, with earnings in 2005 of $5.6

> billion; son made more than $38 million that year. A 2005

annual report

> shows that " Goldman was still a significant player " in issuing

mortgage

> bonds. The conflict of interest is increasingly clear today, as

Bloomberg

> reports that " Goldman Sachs Group Inc. and Stanley may be

among the

> biggest beneficiaries " of son's bailout plan:

>

> Goldman Sachs Group Inc. and Stanley may be among the biggest

> beneficiaries of the $700 billion U.S. plan to buy assets from

financial

> companies while many banks see limited aid, according to Bank of

America

> Corp.

>

> " Its benefits, in its current form, will be largely limited to

investment

> banks and other banks that have aggressively written down the value

of their

> holdings and have already recognized the attendant capital

impairment, "

> Rosenberg, Bank of America's head of credit strategy

research, wrote

> in a report today, without identifying particular investment banks. "

> The conflict of interest provides all the more reason for the

bailout

> legislation in Congress to have more stringent oversight that the

> administration opposes.

>

> The Wonk Room notes six months ago, son claimed, " our banks and

> investment banks, are strong. "

>

> Suze Fisher

>

> " Think occasionally of the suffering of which you spare yourself

the sight. "

> ~Albert Schweitzer

>

[Guest guest]

On 9/24/08, haecklers <haecklers@...> wrote:

> I'm not even commenting because a few years ago I read a lot of the

> Birch stuff about how the world is being run by bankers and now

> my mind is too polluted to be able to tell fact from fiction - some

> of the scariest things I've thought were fiction turned out to have

> more than a grain of truth!

Probably more than a grain. Five months before he was assassinated,

JFK issued an executive order authorizing the Treasury to issue money

that was not borrowed from the Federal Reserve. It was backed by

silver and $4.3 billion " US Treasury Notes " (as opposed to " Federal

Reserve Notes " ) went into circulation. Come November, he was gone.

Who pulled the strings?

Chris

[Guest guest]

>

> I'm not even commenting because a few years ago I read a lot of the

> Birch stuff about how the world is being run by bankers and now

> my mind is too polluted to be able to tell fact from fiction - some

> of the scariest things I've thought were fiction turned out to have

> more than a grain of truth!

Many people beyond the Birch Society are aware of the dirty little

secret that the banksters are running things.

http://www.infowars.com/?p=4774

Bailout: It's all part of the New International Economic Order

" The Trilateral Commission is international and is intended to be the

vehicle for multinational consolidation of the commercial and banking

interests by seizing control of the political government of the United

States, " Barry Goldwater wrote in 1979.

<snip>

" This is not a monarchy, " economist Nouriel Roubini complained earlier this

week.

" No, it's not a monarchy - instead, it's shaping up to be a fascist

dictatorship as Mussolini, the father of fascism, understood it: an

absolutist state controlled by corporations and international bankers.

" If Wall Street gets away with this, " writes Greider for The Nation,

" I predict it will become a transforming event in American politics -

exposing the deep deformities in our democracy and launching a tidal wave of

righteous anger and popular rebellion. "

Mr. Greider may not know it, but the globalists are one step ahead of him.

These would-be rebels will have to deal with the 3rd Infantry Division's 1st

Brigade Combat Team and other components of Northern Command, soon to be " an

on-call federal response force for natural or manmade emergencies and

disasters, including terrorist attacks, " according to the Army Times. It's

an " enduring mission, " dealing with terrorists who are opposed to being

reduced to chattel slaves for the bankers and global elite.

" This is not a plan aimed at reviving the economy, " remarked Brusca,

chief economist of Fact and Opinion Economics.

Brusca's right. It's a plan designed by bankers to steal wealth through

bankruptcy and economic depression. It's designed to reduce you to serfdom

and make you a peon to the New International Economic Order, aka the New

World Order. "

<snip>

See Chris' review of " The Money Masters: How International Bankers Gained

Control of America "

http://www.cholesterol-and-health.com/Money-Masters-Review.html

There's a link to the video on Google Video. This lays out the history of

the international banking cartel and how they came to control our government

as well as those of other countries.

Suze

[Guest guest]

On 9/24/08, Suze Fisher <suzefisher@...> wrote:

> " The Trilateral Commission is international and is intended to be the

> vehicle for multinational consolidation of the commercial and banking

> interests by seizing control of the political government of the United

> States, " Barry Goldwater wrote in 1979.

Rondald Reagan also criticized the TC and pledged to investigate it.

He pledged W. Bush would have no place in his cabinet because

of Bush's connections to TC and CFR. After a media blitz suggesting

former president Gerald Ford should be VP and appoint half of Regan's

cabinet, Reagan asked for Bush to be his VP. Within a couple weeks of

being elected, he was shot by the son of a good friend of Bush who met

with Bush's son Neil the night before and was let off on an insanity

plea in a military trial. Regan's cabinet wound up stuffed with TC,

CFR, and Bilderberg members.

> " No, it's not a monarchy - instead, it's shaping up to be a fascist

> dictatorship as Mussolini, the father of fascism, understood it: an

> absolutist state controlled by corporations and international bankers.

They supported Naziism and fascism at first and then turned against

it. I think they want to utilize the essence of fascism but make it a

faceless kind that it is not centered on a human personality, but is

instead centered on an oligarchy of corporate personalities, so that

it will be a perpetually stable system of power.

Right now, they are basically saying they'd rather the government go

bankrupt than the investment banks go bankrupt. Maybe the banks will

bail out the government next time. They'll fuse together until there

is no clear line separating what a bank is from what the government is

-- kind of like the Fed, only absorbing more than monetary policy, the

entire rest of government.

> Mr. Greider may not know it, but the globalists are one step ahead of him.

> These would-be rebels will have to deal with the 3rd Infantry Division's 1st

> Brigade Combat Team and other components of Northern Command, soon to be " an

> on-call federal response force for natural or manmade emergencies and

> disasters, including terrorist attacks, " according to the Army Times. It's

> an " enduring mission, " dealing with terrorists who are opposed to being

> reduced to chattel slaves for the bankers and global elite.

If the bankers had more control over the execution of the Patriot Act,

who would be defined as a suspected terrorist and lose their right to

habeas corpus and a jury trial? People who default on their credit

cards? People who don't use credit cards, or pay them off in full

every month and never rack up debt?

Who knows? They already use it for drug criminals and peaceful death

penalty protestors.

Chris

[Guest guest]

I guess that makes sense, since Washington/CIA, etc. support more

facist dictatorships than democracies, which they too often overthrow.

It makes you wonder about their motives, doesn't it?? That they live

in a " democracy " but use their power to destroy so many others? Maybe

it's those pesky elections that are so much trouble for them! LOL!

--- In , " Suze Fisher " <suzefisher@...>

wrote:

>

> " This is not a monarchy, " economist Nouriel Roubini complained

earlier this

> week.

>

> " No, it's not a monarchy - instead, it's shaping up to be a fascist

> dictatorship as Mussolini, the father of fascism, understood it: an

> absolutist state controlled by corporations and international

bankers.

[Guest guest]

http://www.wendymcelroy.com/news.php?extend.1923

__________

The Democrat Vs. Republican Sham

If the bailout accomplishes nothing else, it may expose the charade of

the " two-party " system to a few more eyes.

The Democrats' excuse for supporting so much atrocious Bush

legislation (Patriot Act, use of force, Military Commissions Act,

warrantless wiretapping, etc.) has traditionally been that if they

dared to oppose these horrible measures, they'd get slaughtered at the

polls.

Well, guess what: the bailout is a horrible measure, and the voters --

Democrat and Republican -- oppose it by an almost 2 to 1 ratio.

Commentators on the left and the right are denouncing this measure.

(When was the last time Will and Krugman were on the same

side?) People are writing, calling, and emailing their

congresscritters in droves, demanding " no bailout. "

Yet the Democratic leadership is pushing the bailout, and trying to

line up enough Congressional votes to pass it.

It's time to recognize a truth: the dividing line on this legislation

-- like so much other legislation -- isn't Democratic vs. Republican.

It's " inside the Beltway " vs. " outside the Beltway. " The only

constituency for this bailout legislation is the Wall Street tycoons

who stand to gain enormously, the Washington insiders who have

profited handsomely from Wall Street campaign contributions, and those

insiders who will amass great personal power by this legislation.

And there are no " outsiders " in Congress. McCain and Obama may take

the cowardly way out and duck the vote -- but you can be sure they

won't be voting " no " . If either one were a real " outsider " , he would

be standing up now against this lavish giveaway, and would denounce

those who support it.

Not gonna happen. Because they're both on the same side -- the side of

the rulers. And that's not your side.

Brad - Wednesday 24 September 2008