Some Cops Furious NYPD Officer Flashed Peace Sign In Photo With Occupy Wall Street Protester ……..

http://gothamist.com

via photon frequency’s facebook

The above picture, featured on the Facebook profile of someone named “Photon Frequency”, is presented as an example of how police and protesters really can get along: “Much of the NYPD are really on our side. We need to stay away from negative media influence and stay supportive and respectful of their difficult job. Many of the officers I spoke to are supportive of this movement and gratefully acknowledged the peaceful efforts of the protesters.” However, don’t tell that to any of the cops over at Thee Rant police forum—they’re pretty darn annoyed at the cop for posing with these “miscreants.”

Thee Rant is the internet forum for retired and current members of the NYPD, and they seem to heartily disapprove of officers engaging with protesters in any manner other than from an authoritarian position. User 10 08 wrote, “there are only 2 types of reactions you give these people. #1 – NOTHING #2 – ARREST.” BNDB agrees in a long message:

Exactly right! When we do anything else other than the above, we undermine the mission we have as police officers to be proffesional and maintain a STRONG AUTHORITATIVE presence…Act professional at all times!
Dont show any signs of weakness, by doing that, we raise the threat level for all other officers!
Even if we agree with these trust-fund punks, as Police Officers, it is not our job to appease and empathise with them, it is our job to make sure we, and all other officers GO HOME SAFELY!
These punks we stand with, laugh with now, ten minutes later will be throwing their piss and shyte at us, calling us pigs and climbing the barriers to try to fight us…DON’T FORGET THAT!

These trust fund bytches are NOT OUR FRIENDS! They want to see us hurt, either physically or on the job. They want to see us indicted for doing our job. They want to see us lose our jobs, our means for support to our families, they want to see our lives ruined…THEY ARE NOT OUR FRIENDS!

If you really feel that strongly about them, that you empathize with them, then maybe you should think about resigning your position as a New York City Police Officer.

Not everyone is ready to damn the office-in-question: some hope-against-hope that maybe it’s all a big misunderstanding! User bxnarcorgr asks, “Could it be he was bored and in a moment of stupidity, he flashed the peace sign more out of sarcasm than out of sympathy for the cause?” Murray Da COP said, “Maybe the cop is putting in his order for coffee or something. Yea TWO sugars please!”

If this is their reaction to a little peace sign, we can’t wait to see what they think about the protester who allegedly was caught on camera defecating on a cop car.

.

#WikiLeaks – US, France Knew In 2007 Financial Collapse Was Imminent Due To Wall Street Fraud ……..

Posted by Alexander Higgins –

September 3, 2011 at 8:29 pm ,

Source via Alexander Higgins Blog 

In 2007 top US and France officials knew rampant fraud being committed by regulators, rating agencies and Wall Street Banks would soon cause a global financial collapse.Wall

While investors and nations around the world were happily giving trillions of dollars away to crooked Wall Street bankers top officials in the United States and France knew the market would soon collapse and people would be robbed of millions.

While raising the issue that the role of government regulators and rating agencies needed to be reviewed in the wake of the upcoming crisis, US officials ignored calls from the French government to enact necessary regulation to stop the rampant fraud that would soon result in investors losing tens of trillions of dollars they had invested into the markets.

The cable reveals that while discussing the ability of the French banks to survive the crisis, French President Sarkozy was pushing the US to enact regulations to forestall the crisis. Instead, Henry Paulson responded by telling Sarkozy not to overreacted because the” it would take months, not weeks, for credit to be re-priced” telling France this is “not a major crisis.”

Paulson went on to warn that the major problem was with the German banks and which would require a bailout from the taxpayer while warning that the assets held by banks but covered up from investors by being held off-balance sheet presented systematic risk to banks and to sovereign wealth.

The cable clearly reveals that taxpayer bailouts would be needed.  Paulson further up sticks up for the Wall Street hedge fund saying they were not to blame for the crisis while acknowledging there were major Wall Street transparency issues.

To summarize, the cable reveals that top government officials in France and the US knew Wall street banks were committing fraud in the origination and packaging of sub-prime mortgage and lying to investors about the resulting securities they were creating and selling. Officials knew banks were also lying about their own liabilities and hiding them from investors by keeping the assets off their balance sheets.  The government also knew that both regulators and ratings agencies were participating in the scheme.

Remember as you read this cable, these conversations all took place over a year before the 2008 financial collapse when taxpayers around the world were forced into giving up trillions of dollars for banker bailouts. Also keep in mind that while the cable discusses “systemic risk”, “bailouts” and “market turbulence”, none of these had happened yet. They were discussing what would soon happen in the future.

The discussion of “systemic risk”, “market turbulence” and “taxpayer bailouts” over a year before the markets actually collapsed and those events actually occurred, show they knew a global financial collapse. Not only did they know it would occur but knew what the consequences would be for the investors and the governments who were fleeced by Wall Street. As the cable reveals, Paulson chose to deal with the crisis by letting it continue and urging France to keep the issue underwaps  by  urging Sarkozy not  to “over react”, hence allowing the scandal to the continue which just postponed the inevitable.

Also remember when we were forced into these bailouts, it was  under the guise that our governments had no idea the banks were doing this and this was a sudden and unforeseeable crisis. Finally, remember that – while there have been plenty of accusations from “conspiracy theorists”,  “fringe economists” and “wing nut” politicians such as Ron Paul – there still has been no admission from our government that financial regulators or the ratings agencies played a role in the crisis.

 

PAULSON DISCUSSES FINANCIAL MARKETS, IRAN WITH SARKOZY, LAGARDE

Subject	PAULSON DISCUSSES FINANCIAL MARKETS, IRAN WITH SARKOZY, LAGARDE
Origin	Embassy Paris (France)
Cable time	2007-10-01 10:46 UTC
Classification	CONFIDENTIAL
Source	http://wikileaks.org/cable/2007/10/07PARIS4109.html
History	First published on WES, 30 Sep 2011 01:44 UTC

Viewing cable 07PARIS4109, PAULSON DISCUSSES FINANCIAL MARKETS, IRAN WITH SARKOZY, LAGARDE

If you are new to these pages, please read an introduction on the structure of a cable as well as how to discuss them with others. See also the FAQs

Reference ID	Created	Released	Classification	Origin
07PARIS4109	2007-10-01 10:46	2011-08-30 01:44	CONFIDENTIAL	Embassy Paris

 

VZCZCXRO3134
RR RUEHDBU RUEHFL RUEHKW RUEHLA RUEHROV RUEHSR
DE RUEHFR #4109/01 2741046
ZNY CCCCC ZZH
R 011046Z OCT 07
FM AMEMBASSY PARIS
TO RUEHC/SECSTATE WASHDC 0558
RUEATRS/DEPARTMENT OF TREASURY WASHDC
RHEHNSC/NSC WASHINGTON DC
INFO RUEHZL/EUROPEAN POLITICAL COLLECTIVE

 

C O N F I D E N T I A L SECTION 01 OF 02 PARIS 004109 

SIPDIS 

SIPDIS 

E.O. 12958:  DECL:09/18/17
TAGS: EFIN ECON PREL FR
SUBJECT: PAULSON DISCUSSES FINANCIAL MARKETS, IRAN WITH SARKOZY,
LAGARDE 

Classified by EMIN Seth Winnick for reasons 1.4 (b) and (d) 

¶1. (C) Summary: In successive meetings Treasury Secretary Hank
Paulson told Minister of Finance Christine Lagarde and President
Nicolas Sarkozy that it was important not to overreact to
financial market turbulence.  Sarkozy asked for U.S. support for
Dominique Strauss-Kahn's candidacy for IMF Managing Director.
Discussions also touched on continued cooperation on Iran,
Sarkozy's reform agenda and China.  End summary. 

¶2. (C) During a September 17 visit to France, Treasury Secretary
Paulson and accompanying delegation met with Sarkozy and
Lagarde, and lunched with leading representatives of France's
business community.  Sarkozy made a strong push for public U.S.
support for Dominique Strauss-Kahn's candidacy for Managing
Director of the IMF. Calling Strauss-Kahn the "smartest
socialist," Sarkozy said it was important not to encourage
President Putin by entertaining the candidacy Czech Josef
Tosovksy, who has KGB ties. 

¶3. (C) In response to Secretary Paulson's urging that France's
business and financial sectors reduce exposure to Iran, Sarkozy
said the United States could count on French cooperation in
toughening sanctions.  "There will be no double talk from
France. Stopping the bomb is more important than business
contracts."  But Sarkozy said unilateral legislation under
consideration in the U.S. Congress would be a "disaster" and
make the Iranians "very happy."  Sarkozy's diplomatic advisor
Jean-David Levitte noted that France would look to work, if
necessary, outside the Security Council, notably with EU
partners, on further measures against Iran. 

¶4. (C) On sub-prime-related market turbulence, Sarkozy said regulation was needed to forestall 
such events and minimize impact on global economic growth. Paulson underscored the importance of 
not over-reacting. It would take months, not weeks, for credit to be re-priced, 
but this was "not a major crisis." Several issues were coming into focus: conduits and other 
off-balance sheet funding vehicles had been a surprise; in the U.S. there was a need to look at mortgage 
origination, as well as the role of regulatory supervision and rating agencies. Asked for his views 
on French banks, Paulson said they had strong balance sheets and were profitable, though they, too, might 
have challenging off-balance 
sheet obligations. Paulson said the German Landesbanken were "the biggest problem," though they presented 
little systemic risk and would be bailed out by the German taxpayer. 

¶5. (C) Sarkozy asked for views on U.S. exchange rate policy.
Paulson said the United States supported a strong dollar.
Exchange rates ultimately were market-driven and the U.S. would
pursue policies that increased confidence in the U.S. economy.
In an exchange on China, Paulson said the U.S. message to China
was that if it wanted to be a "member of the club," it needed to
adhere to global norms on issues such as Sudan, Iran as well as
market-determined exchange rates.  The real concern was not that
China's economy would pass that of the United States, but that
China would reform too slowly and ultimately run into problems.
Paulson asked Sarkozy to "make a big impact" in China by
carrying a similar message. 

¶6. (C) In a brief exchange on trade issues, Sarkozy said France
was not afraid of globalization, but would insist on reciprocity
in its foreign relations.  Sarkozy was not shocked that the
United States defended its farmers: "we're doing the same."
Paulson pushed Sarkozy to help "drive Doha to a conclusion."
Sarkozy would "do (his) best," butQould not support a deal that
was not fair to France. 

Lagarde on Economic Reform, China and Financial Markets
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 

¶7. (C) Finance Minister Lagarde sketched out GOF reform
priorities, saying the real focus would be on France's social
programs and associated costs.  Reform of the so-called "special
pension regimes" for certain categories of public workers
(including rail workers) was high on the agenda.  The GOF wanted
to bring such pensions in line with those of other public sector
employees.  Lagarde acknowledged that the issue had brought down
the Juppe government in the mid 1990s, but said the GOF would be
tough on pension reform.  Product market reform - including
changes to distribution and retail sectors - was also in the
offing. 

¶8. (C) Touching on issues subsequently raised by Sarkozy,
Lagarde said the GOF wanted strong cooperation on Iran.  She
suggested an informal U.S. Treasury - Ministry of Finance "task
force" be created to look at Iran-related banking issues.
Paulson noted that BNP-Paribas had suspended work in Iran, but
that Natixis had become more active.  Beyond the financial 

PARIS 00004109  002 OF 002 

sector, it would be important to look at the role of industrial
companies in Iran, Paulson said.  Although France's exports to
Iran were a small percentage of its overall exports, they
represented 8% of Iran's imports.  French Treasury director
Xavier Musca underscored the importance of the U.S. consulting
with the GOF before engaging directly with French banks on Iran. 

¶9. (C) Lagarde and Musca worried about China's (as well as the
UAE's) role as financier for Iran, as well as its undermining of
good governance efforts in Africa with easy money.  More
generally, Lagarde said the weakness of the yuan was "hurting
our economies."  The 9/14 informal Ecofin meeting in Porto saw
agreement to add exchange rate issues to the EU - China summit
agenda in November.  Lagarde suggested that Brazil and South
Africa be brought in on the issue.  Paulson said the U.S. was
pushing for reform and financial market opening in China, and
"this would help all investors."  He agreed to raise yuan
exchange rate issue with RSA Finance Minister Trevor Manuel in
the context of the November G-20 finance ministers meeting. 

¶10. (C) On financial market issues, Lagarde said the large French banks were strong, 
with minimal exposure to asset-backed securities. She was "fairly confident" that the smaller 
banks were also well-positioned. Market transparency and related issues had been discussed in Porto, 
and would be the subject of ongoing consultations within the EU. Paulson said the President's Working Group 
on Financial Markets was looking at similar issues, including conduits and off-balance-sheet items of 
regulated institutions. But it was important to guard against overreaction. In particular Paulson said he sensed 
that Europe was "obsessed" with hedge funds. Though the link to regulated institutions (via bank lending) 
was an important issue, it was hard to blame hedge funds for current market turbulence. Asked about sovereign 
wealth funds, Lagarde saidQ the issue was not as big a deal in France as it was in Germany. 

¶11. (U) The Paulson delegation has cleared this cable. 

STAPLETON.

Imperialism: Bankers, Drug Wars and Genocide

by Prof. James Petras
Global Research, May 19, 2011
In May 2011, Mexican investigators uncovered another mass clandestine grave with dozens of mutilated corpses; bringing the total number of victims to 40,000 killed since 2006 when the Calderon regime announced its “war on drug traffickers”. Backed by advisers, agents and arms, the White House has been the principal promotor of a ‘war’ that has totally decimated Mexico ’s society and economy. If Washington has been the driving force for the regime’s war, Wall Street banks have been the main instruments ensuring the profits of the drug cartels. Every major US bank has been deeply involved in laundering hundreds of billions of dollars in drug profits, for the better part of the past decade. Mexico ’s descent into this inferno has been engineered by the leading US financial and political institutions, each supporting ‘one side or the other’ in the bloody “total war” which spares no one, no place and no moment in time. While the Pentagon arms the Mexican government and the US Drug Enforcement Agency enforces the “military solution”, the biggest US banks receive, launder and transfer hundreds of billions of dollars to the drug lords’ accounts, who then buy modern arms, pay private armies of assassins and corrupt untold numbers of political and law enforcement officials on both sides of the border. Mexico’s Descent in the Inferno Everyday scores, if not hundreds, of corpses – appear in streets and or are found in unmarked graves; dozens are murdered in their homes, cars, public transport, offices and even hospitals; known and unknown victims in the hundreds are kidnapped and disappear; school children, parents, teachers, doctors and businesspeople are seized in broad daylight and held for ransom or murdered in retaliation. Thousands of migrant workers are kidnapped, robbed, ransomed, murdered and evidence is emerging that some are sold into the illegal ‘organ trade’. The police are barricaded in their commissaries; the military, if and when it arrives, takes out its frustration on entire cities, shooting more civilians than cartel soldiers. Everyday life revolves around surviving the daily death toll; threats are everywhere, the armed gangs and military patrols fire and kill with virtual impunity. People live in fear and anger. The Free Trade Agreement: The Sparks that lit the Inferno In the late 1980’s, Mexico was in crisis, but the people chose a legal way out: they elected a President, Cuahtemoc Cardenas, on the basis of his national program to promote the economic revitalization of agriculture and industry. The Mexican elite, led by Carlos Salinas of the Institutional Revolutionary Party (PRI) chose otherwise and subverted the election: The electorate was denied its victory; the peaceful mass protests were ignored. Salinas and subsequent Mexican presidents vigorously pursued a free trade agreement (NAFTA) with the US and Canada , which rapidly drove millions of Mexican farmers, ranchers and small business people into bankruptcy. Devastation led to the flight of millions of immigrant workers. Rural movements of debtors flourished and ebbed, were co-opted or repressed. The misery of the legal economy contrasted with the burgeoning wealth of the traffickers of drugs and people, which generated a growing demand for well-paid armed auxiliaries as soldiers for the cartels. The regional drug syndicates emerged out of the local affluence. In the new millennium, popular movements and a new electoral hope arose: Andres Manuel Lopez Obrador (AMLO). By 2006 a vast peaceful electoral movement promised substantial social and economic reforms to ‘integrate millions of disaffected youth’. In the parallel economy, the drug cartels were expanding and benefiting from the misery of millions of workers and peasants marginalized by the Mexican elite, who had plundered the public treasury, speculated in real estate, robbed the oil industry and created enormous privatized monopolies in the communication and banking sectors. In 2006, millions of Mexican voters were once again denied their electoral victory: The last best hope for a peaceful transformation was dashed. Backed by the US Administration, Felipe Calderon stole the election and proceeded to launch the “War on Drug Traffickers” strategy dictated by Washington . The War Strategy Escalates the Drug War: The Banking Crises Deepens the Ties with Drug Traffickers The massive escalation of homicides and violence in Mexico began with the declaration of a war on the drug cartels by the fraudulently elected President Calderon, a policy pushed initially by the Bush Administration and subsequently strongly backed by the Obama – Clinton regime. Over 40,000 Mexican soldiers filled the streets, towns and barrios – violently assaulting citizens – especially young people. The cartels retaliated by escalating their armed assaults on police. The war spread to all the major cities and along the major highways and rural roads; murders multiplied and Mexico descended further into a Dantesque inferno. Meanwhile, the Obama regime ‘reaffirmed’ its support for a militarist solution on both sides of the border: Over 500,000 Mexican immigrants were seized and expelled from the US ; heavily armed border patrols multiplied. Cross border gun sales grew exponentially .The US “market” for Mexican manufactured goods and agricultural products shrank, further widening the pool for cartel recruits while the supply of high powered weapons increased. White House gun and drug policies strengthened both sides in this maniacal murderous cycle: The US government armed the Calderon regime and the American gun manufacturers sold guns to the cartels through both legal and underground arms sales. Steady or increasing demand for drugs in the US – and the grotesque profits derived from trafficking and sales— remained the primary driving force behind the tidal wave of violence and societal disintegration in Mexico . Drug profits, in the most basic sense, are secured through the ability of the cartels to launder and transfer billions of dollars through the US banking system. The scale and scope of the US banking-drug cartel alliance surpasses any other economic activity of the US private banking system. According to US Justice Department records, one bank alone, Wachovia Bank (now owned by Wells Fargo), laundered $378.3 billion dollars between May 1, 2004 and May 31, 2007 (The Guardian, May 11, 2011). Every major bank in the US has served as an active financial partner of the murderous drug cartels – including Bank of America, Citibank, and JP Morgan, as well as overseas banks operating out of New York , Miami and Los Angeles , as well as London . While the White House pays the Mexican state and army to kill Mexicans suspected of drug trafficking, the US Justice Department belatedly slaps a relatively small fine on the major US financial accomplice to the murderous drug trade, Wachovia Bank, spares its bank officials from any jail time and allows major cases to lapse into dismissal. The major agency of the US Treasury involved in investigating money laundering, the Undersecretary for Terrorism and Financial Intelligence, deliberately ignored the blatant collaboration of US banks with drug terrorists, concentrating almost their entire staff and resources on enforcing sanctions against Iran . For seven years, Treasury Undersecretary Stuart Levey used his power as head of the Department for Terrorism and Financial Intelligence to pursue Israel ’s phony “war on terrorism” against Iran , rather than shut down Wachovia’s money-laundering operations with the Mexican drug terrorists. In this period of time an estimated 40,000 Mexican civilian have been killed by the cartels and the army. Without US arms and financial services supporting both the illegitimate Mexican regimes and the drug cartels – there could be no “drug war”, no mass killings and no state terror. The simple acts of stopping the flood of cheap subsidized US agriculture products into Mexico and de-criminalizing the use and purchase of cocaine in the US would dry up the pool of ‘cartel soldiers’ from the bankrupted Mexican peasantry and the cut back the profits and demand for illegal drugs in the US market. The Drug Traffickers, the Banks and the White House If the major US banks are the financial engines which allow the billion dollar drug empires to operate, the White House, the US Congress and the law enforcement agencies are the basic protectors of these banks. Despite the deep and pervasive involvement of the major banks in laundering hundreds of billions of dollars in illicit funds, the “court settlements” pursued by US prosecutors have led to no jail time for the bankers. One court’s settlement amounted to a fine of $50 million dollars, less than 0.5% of one of the banks (the Wachovia/Wells Fargo bank) $12.3 billion profits for 2009 (The Guardian, May 11, 2011). Despite the death of tens of thousands of Mexican civilians, US executive branch directed the DEA, the federal prosecutors and judges to impose such a laughable ‘punishment’ on Wachovia for its illegal services to the drug cartels. The most prominent economic officials of the Bush and Obama regimes, including Summers, Paulson, Geithner, Greenspan, Bernacke et al, are all long term associates, advisers and members of the leading financial houses and banks implicated in laundering the billions of drug profits. Laundering drug money is one of the most lucrative sources of profit for Wall Street; the banks charge hefty commissions on the transfer of drug profits, which they then lend to borrowing institutions at interest rates far above what – if any – they pay to drug trafficker depositors. Awash in sanitized drug profits, these US titans of the finance world can easily buy their own elected officials to perpetuate the system. Even more important and less obvious is the role of drug money in the recent financial meltdown, especially during its most critical first few weeks. According to the head of United Nation’s Office on Drugs and Crime, Antonio Maria Costa, “In many instances, drug money (was)… currently the only liquid investment capital…. In the second half of 2008, liquidity was the banking system’s main problem and hence liquid capital became an important factor…interbank loans were funded by money that originated from drug trade and other illegal activities… (there were) signs that some banks were rescued in that way.” (Reuters, January 25,2009. US edition). Capital flows from the drug billionaires were key to floating Wachovia and other leading banks. In a word: the drug billionaires saved the capitalist financial system from collapse! Conclusion By the end of the first decade of the 21st century, it has become clear that capital accumulation, at least in North America, is intimately linked to generalized violence and drug trafficking. Because capital accumulation is dependent on financial capital, and the latter is dependent on the industry profits from the multi-hundred-billion dollar drug trade, the entire ensemble is embedded in the ‘total war’ over drug profits. In times of deep crises the very survival of the US financial system – and through it, the world banking system – is linked to the liquidity of the drug “industry”. At the most superficial level the destruction of Mexican and Central American societies – encompassing over 100 million people – is a result of a conflict between drug cartels and the political regimes of the region. At a deeper level there is a multiplier or “ripple effect” related to their collaboration: the cartels draw on the support of the US banks to realize their profits; they spend hundreds of millions on the US arms industry and others to secure their supplies, transport and markets; they employ tens of thousands of recruits for their vast private armies and civilian networks and they purchase the compliance of political and military officials on both sides of the borders For its part, the Mexican government acts as a conduit for US Pentagon/Federal police, Homeland Security, drug enforcement and political apparatuses prosecuting the ‘war’, which has put Mexican lives, property and security at risk. The White House stands at the strategic center of operations – the Mexican regime serves as the front-line executioners. On one side of the “war on drugs” are the major Wall Street banks; on the other side, the White House and its imperial military strategists and in the ‘middle’ are 90 million Mexicans and 40,000 murder victims and counting. Relying on political fraud to impose economic deregulation in the 1990’s (neo-liberalism), the US policies led directly to the social disintegration, criminalization and militarization of the current decade. The sophisticated narco-finance economy has now become the most advanced stage of neo-liberalism. When the respectable become criminals, the criminals become respectable. The issue of genocide in Mexico has been determined by the empire and its “knowing” bankers and cynical rulers.
Global Research Articles by James Petras.

US : The True Cost Of The Wall Street Bailout

http://dailybail.com

org. Artikel with Video here

Special report from Bloomberg — Adding It All Up

Allison Stewart from Need to Know with Bloomberg reporter Bob Ivry.  None of this is new to Bail readers, though the details might surprise you.  The Bloomberg total is $12.8 trillion.

We all know about TARP, the Troubled Asset Relief Program, which spent $700 billion in taxpayers’ money to bail out banks after the financial crisis. That money was scrutinized by Congress and the media.

But it turns out that that $700 billion is just a small part of a much larger pool of money that has gone into propping up our nation’s financial system. And most of that taxpayer money hasn’t had much public scrutiny at all.

According to a team at Bloomberg News, at one point last year the U.S. had lent, spent or guaranteed as much as $12.8 trillion to rescue the economy. The Bloomberg reporters have been following that money. Alison Stewart spoke with one, Bob Ivry, to talk about the true cost to the taxpayer of the Wall Street bailout.

##

.

The Daily Bail ………

http://dailybail.com

« Rothschild Bank AND Goldman Sachs Are Both On The LIST Of Bondholders Getting U.S. Taxpayer Billions In Irish Bailout »

Complete list of bondholders inside, and BBC footage of Sir Eveylyn de Rothschild.  The deceased Guy de Rothschild, pictured, no longer exploits the masses for banking profit, but his progeny carry on his legacy effectively.

—

Scroll down for VIDEO of Sir Evelyn de Rothschild…

—

U.S. taxpayers finance approximately 20% of the IMF’s budget.

Guess what, Ireland.  Brian Lenihan and Brian Cowen just sold you down the IMF river.  Why?  To bail out bank bondholders and giant European banks.  Of course! That’s what governments are for these days, apparently.  And they’ll tell you that the bailout policy is all for you own good.   And for little old ladies and pensioners and orphans.  Just don’t tell that to the cancer patients.

Yep, another nation made IMF debt slaves on behalf of the international banking cartels.  And Goldman Sachs and Rothschild & Compagnie are on the list.

Check it out below — Guido Fawkes’ blog has acquired the list of Anglo-Irish Bank’s bondholders.

##

From Guido Fawke…

Anglo-Irish Bank did not represent a systemic risk to the Irish economy, it wasn’t a high street bank like AIB or the Bank of Ireland. If it had been allowed to go the way of Lehmans the only losers would have been shareholders and bondholders. The Irish state stepped in and nationalised a bank that was basically run by crooks lending to property speculators.

• The Irish people are taking losses that should rightly have been shouldered by bondholders.

Every child in Ireland is being bequeathed a huge debt at birth to protect the interests of foreign, mainly German, bondholders – why?  Guido was once a bond trader, it was always understood that sometimes the bond issuer defaults.

• That is the risk investors take.

So why is Dublin’s political establishment so keen to protect foreign investors at the expense of future generations?  Guido has obtained the list of foreign Anglo-Irish bondholders as at the close of business tonight.  These are the people whom Dublin’s politicians really seem to care about:

—

Great analysis of the list from the Golem XIV…

Of the 80 listed companies only 7 listed pensions and being a cooperative savings institution. Of those only 4 listed churches and unions as their clients, the others could well have been big pension funds. The churches and unions in question were in Germany not Ireland.  Those seven companies are amongst the smallest of Anglo Irish’s bond holders.  I only have figures for four of the seven.  The largest, Union Investments of Germany, has a mere €165 billion in assets under management.

The total assets under management which I was able to compile from publicly available figures is €20,871,150,000,000.   That is an underestimate because the bond holders who turn out to be Private and Swiss banks don’t publish any figures.  So Anglo Irish’s ‘bond holders’ hold and invest MORE than 20.8 trillion euros.  Guido lists those bond holders as holding between them 4 Billion euros in Anglo Irish bonds.

Now, in my opinion both figures are likely to be wrong.  Certainly my figure is a large underestimate.  But taking them at face value Anglo Irish would account for one 5000th of the total assets being managed by all the bond holders.  So would even a total default by Anglo Irish cause that much, let alone systemic, pain and risk? Why are the ‘Bond holders’ and the Irish government so concerned that the Irish people be forced to take the loss and pay the debts for them?

Now lets look at the other side of the equation, at Ireland itself.  Well Ireland’s GDP before the crash, in 2008, was … drum roll please… €207 billion.  Or 0.207 trillion.

SO….  on one side we have Ireland whose bond holders, its people, have between them a total GDP wealth of 0.207 trillion euros.  Who are being FORCED, against their will, to pay Anglo Irish bank’s debts to its bond holders, who between them hold 20.8 Trillion euros.  The people of Ireland are paying to, and protecting the wealth and power of, people who have 100 times more wealth!

So where do these wealthy bond holders live and work?

Germany has the most with 15 of the bond holders. Who between them hold 5.3 trillion euros.
France is next with 10 bond holders.  Who have about 4 trillion to keep them warm.
Britain is third with 9 who have around 3 trillion.
The Swiss have 6 but who have about 8.5 trillion.
America has only three and hold only a trillion.

Other nations include, Spain, Belgium, Portugal, Holland Finland, Norway, Sweden, Poland, South Africa and Italy.

All these figures are very rough.  The figure for Switzerland is certainly under because Private Swiss banks just don’t publish figures.  What we can say for sure, figures or no figures, is these are not banks investing widow’s pensions or orphan’s pennies.

So who are they? Well many of the bond holders are privately held banks, which list their activities as asset management for off-shore, non-resident and high value individuals.  To give you an example, one of the private banks is EFG Bank of Luxembourg.  EFG stands for European Financial Group which is the third largest private bank group in Switzerland.  It manages over €7.5 trillion in assets.  It is ‘mostly’, 40%, owned  by Mr Spiro Latsis, son of a Greek shipping magnate.  He also owns 30% of Hellenic Petroleum.  His personal fortune is estimated to be about $9 Billion.

Continue reading…

—

DB here.  Blasphemous rape of a nation in order to reward billionaire bondholders who were reckless investors and malignant in oversight.

Video – Text from Youtube page – Sir EVELYN DE ROTHSCHILD talks about the global financial crisis to the BBC in October 2008…

In 2003, following the retirement of Sir Evelyn de Rothschild as head of N M Rothschild & Sons of London, the English and French firms merged to become one umbrella entity called “Group Rothschild.”  Ownership was shared equally between the French and English branches of the family under the leadership of David de Rothschild.  In 2007, the English branch sold their share to the French branch.  The French branch now fully own N M Rothschild & Sons.

Related stories:

• Irish Protestors Occupy Ministry Of Finance In Massive Anti-Bank Bailout Show Of Force (VIDEO)

• Ireland To Spend More Than 50% Of GDP To Bailout Banks (But Bank Bondholders Will Not Lose A Dime!)

• In Ireland, Cancer Patients Lose Out To Bank Bondholders

.

The secret Wall Street bailout

http://english.aljazeera.net

The US doled out $12.3 trillion dollars to finance bailouts, a figure far higher than what was previously stated.

Danny Schechter Last Modified: 09 Dec 2010 16:36 GMT

The US Federal Reserve chairman looked depressed in an interview with the television show 60 minutes because the economy may be heading for a depression, says Danny Schechter [GALLO/GETTY]

.

Go, Wall Street, Go!

Never mind the rise in unemployment and foreclosures. Never mind the folks waiting to know if they will get the benefits they need before they are cut off. Never mind the growing gap between rich and poor, and the rapid spread of poverty. (Did you know that inequality in the US is at the highest level of any industrialised country?)

Does any of this matter?

The idea of equality as a social goal is apparently passé. Christmas has a special meaning on Wall Street: It’s bonus time.

Just five too big to fail bankster companies have stashed $90 billion for payouts to prized employees. They know that the beat on The Street is fading, so it seems to be take the money and run time. Incidentally, that “bonus pool” will rise with end of the year earnings.

Right now, the greedsters have a PR problem – how to transfer all this wealth from the banks to themselves with the lowest possible tax rate and the lowest degree of bad publicity. They also will try to focus the media on supporting their right to such over the top rewards and “incentives” in the name, of course, of fostering an economic recovery.

Selling your soul for a sixpence

Yes, it is a cynical exercise but no more blatant that the successful campaign to extend the Bush tax cuts for millionaires. The mantra is simple: to those who have, more should be given. So say the faux populists of the Tea Party and their Republican benefactors. So say the Democrats in the interest of compromise and getting some unemployment benefits to workers even at an unacceptable cost.

Who will remind the American people that many of these banks are only here to pay because the government – our government – bailed them out and, then, the Federal Reserve Bank pumped trillions in low-interest loans into their coffers.

Can we count on the media to point this out, to make the connection clear about the many government subsidies behind the gigantic payouts that are on the way to companies lobbying against government programs? Don’t count on it.

Last Sunday, the television programme 60 Minutes sat down with Federal Reserve Chairman Ben Bernanke, they asked him about the bonuses. The Fed head had nothing to say about that. He just wanted to praise his own efforts to save the financial system.

The language that never lies

If you watched his body language you could see that his stab at optimism was forced. He admitted it will be at least five years – if that – before more jobs come back. He seemed depressed perhaps because he didn’t want to tell us we are in a depression. His past track record as a forecaster has been flawed to a fault. That was not noted.

As is common these days on the networks, no criticisms or contrary concerns integrated into this world-shaking interview. There was no comment from Bernie Sanders who challenged the Fed’s admission of a “jaw-dropping” injection of trillions into banks here and abroad. There wasn’t even a response from libertarians like Ron Paul who was also horrified.

So much for reporting.

David Degraw of Amped Status says the recent Fed disclosures were shocking.

“Just when I thought the banksters couldn’t possibly shock me anymore… they did. We were finally granted the honour and privilege of finding out the specifics, a limited one-time Federal Reserve view, of a secret taxpayer funded ‘backdoor bailout’ by a small group of unelected bankers. This data release reveals ‘emergency lending programs’ that doled out $12.3 trillion in taxpayer money – $3.3 trillion in liquidity, $9 trillion in ‘other financial arrangements.’ Wait, what? Did you say $12.3 trillion tax dollars were thrown around in secrecy by unelected bankers… and Congress didn’t know any of the details!?”

Of course not!

Wall Street: master of puppets

The myth that the media continues to truck in, is that somehow the Congress and the President are in charge of the economy. They aren’t. Wall Street and the corporate world are clearly running the show, with little restraint so far, effective oversight or regulation.

Back to Degraw: “The Federal Reserve was secretly throwing around our money in unprecedented fashion, and it wasn’t just to the usual suspects like Goldman Sachs, JP Morgan, Citigroup, Bank of America, etc.; it was to the entire Global Banking Cartel. To central banks throughout the world: Australia, Denmark, Japan, Mexico, Norway, South Korea, Sweden, Switzerland, England… To the Fed’s foreign primary dealers like Credit Suisse (Switzerland), Deutsche Bank (Germany), Royal Bank of Scotland (UK), Barclays (UK), BNP Paribas (France)… All their Ponzi players were ‘gifted.’ All the Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organisations got their cut.”

Degraw continues: “If you still had any question as to whether or not the United States is now the world’s preeminent banana republic, the final verdict was just delivered and the decision was unanimous. The ayes have it…. I’ve been arguing for years that the market is rigged and that the major Wall Street firms are elaborate Ponzi schemes, as have many other people who built their beliefs on rational thought, reasoned logic and evidence. We already came to this conclusion by doing the research and connecting the dots.”

Where does this leave us?  Is there any hope?

In search of a ‘scape goat’

The critics of the Fed see little: There are some related developments underway that could shake things up. The Bernie Madoff ponzi probers are targeting banks including HSBC that went along with his $65 bn dollar fraud. A Swiss bank has already admitted it was complicit. The FDIC is investigating officials from banks that failed. Bank of America just coughed up millions for financing an illicit bond scheme.

At the same time, the “Justice Department” has mounted an investigation into insider trading. They say there are 343 criminal investigations underway but none against big players. ProRublica writes: “Everyone is wondering: Where are the investigations related to the financial crisis?”

John Hueston, a former lead Enron prosecutor, wonders: “Have they committed the resources in the right place? … Nobody from Lehman, Merrill Lynch or Citigroup has been charged criminally with anything.”

At the same time, WikiLeaks is promising new revelations about financial chicanery at a major US bank that many suspect is Bank of America. On the housing front, many class action suits and investigations by state officials are challenging major fraudclosures.

The crimes of Wall Street may yet do the bonus babies in. There is still a slim chance that, as the economy gets worse, the people of this country will finally get to see through the haze and the BS and act. Neither the Democrats nor the Repugnicans seem to have any fresh ideas.

It’s up to us to break through our own illusions to fight the plunder of our country and world. We need to call for a jailout, not a bailout. of financial criminals – a full investigation followed by the prosecution of wrong doers. We need a campaign for economic justice.

If you are as disgusted by all this, as I am, it’s time to act. Will we? Will you?

Danny Schechter edits Mediachannel.org. He directed Plunder The Crime of Our Time, a film on DVD about the financial crisis as a crime story. (Plunderthecrimeofourtime.com)

The views expressed in this article are the author’s own and do not necessarily reflect Al Jazeera’s editorial policy.

 

.