“Guns and Butter
“Genetic Roulette” with Jeffrey M. Smith. Genetic engineering unnaturally crosses the species barrier with unknown long-term consequences; serious health risks associated with ingesting genetically modified food including infertility, immune problems, inflamation, accelerated aging, and changes in major organs and the gastrointestinal system; no long-term scientific studies conducted; regulatory capture by the gmo industry; intimidation of researchers; California Proposition 37.”
“Republican presidential candidate Mitt Romney is facing new scrutiny over revelations he founded the private equity firm Bain Capital with investments from Central American elites linked to death squads in El Salvador. After initially struggling to find investors, Romney traveled to Miami in 1983 to win pledges of $9 million, 40 percent of Bain’s start-up money. Some investors had extensive ties to the death squads responsible for the vast majority of the tens of thousands of deaths in El Salvador during the 1980s. We’re joined by Huffington Post reporter Ryan Grim, who connects the dots in his latest story, “Mitt Romney Started Bain Capital With Money From Families Tied To Death Squads.” “There’s no possible way that anybody in 1984 could check out these families — which was the term that [Romney’s campaign] used — and come away convinced that this money was clean,” Grim says. …”
He was just making latin america safe for sweatshops that competed for US jobs. And using the proceeds to take over and dismantle US companies.
That this economic terrorist is running for president, and that he has a chance of winning, is a testament to the condition this country is in.
“Huffington Post notes, in a story entitled “New Obama Foreclosure Plan Helps Banks At Taxpayers’ Expense “:
A key new condition in the plan would shift the financial liability for refinanced loans from Wall Street banks to the American taxpayer.
The newly expanded program would expunge legal liabilities associated with mortgages refinanced through the program for the original lenders of the mortgages. Each time a bank sent a loan to Fannie and Freddie, it certified that the loan met Fannie and Freddie’s safe lending criteria. But many loans sent to the mortgage giants did not, in fact, meet those criteria. Currently, when borrowers default on those ineligible loans, the mortgage giants can “put back” the resulting losses onto the banks that pushed the loans.
Under the modified plan, “put back” liability at banks will be erased for any underwater mortgage that is refinanced through HARP, eliminating Fannie and Freddie’s ability to sack lenders with losses in the event that the mortgage does not pan out.
If borrowers go through HARP, but decide after several months that the modest monthly savings do not outweigh owing tens of thousands of dollars more than their home is worth, taxpayer-owned Fannie and Freddie will have to take the full loss. Even if the original loan was sent to Fannie and Freddie with false or fraudulent guarantees from the bank — promises that may directly be tied to the borrower’s current financial problems — banks will be immune from liability. Fannie and Freddie plan to charge banks “a modest fee” to extinguish this liability, but the administration has yet to determine what that fee will be.
“In most cases people would probably be better off walking,” said economist Dean Baker, co-director of the Center for Economic Policy and Research. …”
Obama has lied repeatedly about a multitude of issues, from his sponsorship of the indefinite detention provisions of the NDAA:
To his concern for the plight of defrauded and underwater homeowners:
AMY GOODMAN: Congressman Kucinich, can you explain how it is that the Democrats are in charge, yet the Democrats back down on their demand to give bankruptcy judges authority to alter the terms of mortgages for homeowners facing foreclosure, that Democrats also failed in their attempt to steer a portion of any government profits from the package to affordable housing programs?
REP. DENNIS KUCINICH: Well, I mean, those are two of the most glaring deficiencies in this bill. And I would maintain there was never any intention to — you know, well, many members of Congress had the intention of helping people who were in foreclosure. You know, this — Wall Street doesn’t want to do that. Wall Street wants to grab whatever change they can and equity that’s left in these properties. So —-
AMY GOODMAN: Right, but the Democrats are in charge of this.
REP. DENNIS KUCINICH: Right. You know, I’ll tell you something that we were told in our caucus. We were told that our presidential candidate, when the negotiations started at the White House, said that he didn’t want this in this bill. Now, that’s what we were told.
AMY GOODMAN: You were told that Barack Obama did not want this in the bill?
REP. DENNIS KUCINICH: That he didn’t want the bankruptcy provisions in the bill. Now, you know, that’s what we were told. And I don’t understand why he would say that, if he did say that. And I think that there is a -— the fact that we didn’t put bankruptcy provisions in, that actually we removed any hope for judges to do any loan modifications or any forbearance. There’s no moratorium on mortgage foreclosures in here. So, who’s getting — who’s really getting helped by this bill? This is a bailout, pure and simple, of Wall Street interests who have been involved in speculation.
“(Reuters) – U.S. Attorney General Eric Holder and Lanny Breuer, head of the Justice Department’s criminal division, were partners for years at a Washington law firm that represented a Who’s Who of big banks and other companies at the center of alleged foreclosure fraud, a Reuters inquiry shows. …
“Multinational investment bank Goldman Sachs has escaped a US government lawsuit for suspected fraudulent trades made during the financial crisis. A senate probe revealed evidence the bank deliberately deceived investors during the economic downturn.
“The Department of Justice and investigative agencies say “the burden of proof to bring a criminal case could not be met based on the law and facts as they exist at this time,” despite evidence revealed by the probe that Goldman Sachs deliberately misled its customers. They added that should more information come to light then the verdict could potentially change.
“The Justice Department said that it had conducted an “exhaustive investigation” into allegations of fraud during the crisis from 2008 to 2009. The probe reportedly uncovered email conversations between employees of Goldman Sachs branding mortgage securities sold to investors as “junk” and “crap”.
“Moreover, the probe writes that the bank “used net short positions to benefit from the downturn in the mortgage market, and designed, marketed, and sold CDOs [collateralized debt obligations] in ways that created conflicts of interest with the firm’s clients and at times led to the bank’s profiting from the same products that caused substantial losses for its clients.” …
“Totally Busted: The Truth About Goldman’s Bailout by the Fed
“Recent disclosures from the Federal Reserve reveal that honesty was one of the earliest casualties of the 2008 financial crisis. These disclosures contain a number of juicy tidbits, like the fact that Goldman Sachs received tens of billions of dollars in direct and indirect succor from the Fed.
“Thanks to these spectacularly large taxpayer-funded bailouts, Goldman was able to continue “doing God’s Work” – as CEO Lloyd Blankfein infamously remarked – like the work of producing billion-dollar trading profits without ever suffering a single day of losses.
“Thanks to the Fed’s massive, undisclosed assistance, Goldman Sachs managed to project an image of financial well-being, even while accessing tens of billions of dollars of direct assistance from the Federal Reserve.
“By repaying its TARP loan, for example, Goldman wriggled out from under the nettlesome compensation limits imposed by TARP, while also conveying an image of financial strength. But this “strength” was illusory. Goldman repaid the TARP loans with funds it procured days earlier from the Federal Reserve. Then, over the ensuing months, Goldman recapitalized its balance sheet by selling tens of billions of dollars of mortgage-backed securities to the Fed. …”
How did GS know to bet against the subprime housing market using the CIA cutout AIG? Among other things, they were in a position to know about GWBush’s being an accessory to the systemic fraud going on in mortgage lending (see “bush helped engineer subprime collapse” in the reference section). They would have known the ratings agencies like S&P and Moodys were issuing fraudulent endorsements of this worthless paper. They obviously knew greenspan had (against strenuous objections from economists from all over the political spectrum) blown up a huge bubble. They knew clinton had set the stage for wholesale fraud in the housing market by allowing freddie mac and fannie mae to purchase these fraudulent instruments and underwrite them with taxpayer money. And they knew the bank for international settlements (the central bankers central bank) had fundamentally changed the rules for mortgage backed securities and banking in general, at the worst possible time:
“Basel II requires banks to adjust the value of their marketable securities to the “market price” of the security, a rule called “mark to market.”9 The rule has theoretical merit, but the problem is timing: it was imposed ex post facto, after the banks already had the hard-to-market assets on their books. Lenders that had been considered sufficiently well capitalized to make new loans suddenly found they were insolvent. At least, they would have been insolvent if they had tried to sell their assets, an assumption required by the new rule. Financial analyst John Berlau complained:
“The crisis is often called a ‘market failure,’ and the term ‘mark-to-market’ seems to reinforce that. But the mark-to-market rules are profoundly anti-market and hinder the free-market function of price discovery. . . . In this case, the accounting rules fail to allow the market players to hold on to an asset if they don’t like what the market is currently fetching, an important market action that affects price discovery in areas from agriculture to antiques.”10
“Imposing the mark-to-market rule on U.S. banks caused an instant credit freeze, which proceeded to take down the economies not only of the U.S. but of countries worldwide. In early April 2009, the mark-to-market rule was finally softened by the U.S. Financial Accounting Standards Board (FASB); but critics said the modification did not go far enough, and it was done in response to pressure from politicians and bankers, not out of any fundamental change of heart or policies by the BIS.
“And that is where the conspiracy theorists come in. Why did the BIS not retract or at least modify Basel II after seeing the devastation it had caused? Why did it sit idly by as the global economy came crashing down? Was the goal to create so much economic havoc that the world would rush with relief into the waiting arms of the BIS with its privately-created global currency? The plot thickens . . . . “
This would be nothing but speculation except for the fact that people who are paid to study and understand economics, regulation and fraud, such as Catherine Austin Fitts, saw this coming 10 years ago. How did it escape the attention of the insiders? Clearly, it didn’t.
When GS’s Blankfein stated that they were “doing god’s work” he was talking about darwin’s idea of god: killing off the weak for the greater glory of the strong. In other words, this is not a gentleman’s game they’re playing. They are creating an empire of corruption. If you’re an insider, you have it made. Otherwise, you have decisions to make.
“(Reuters) – U.S. regulators directed five of the country’s biggest banks, including Bank of America Corp and Goldman Sachs Group Inc, to develop plans for staving off collapse if they faced serious problems, emphasizing that the banks could not count on government help.
The two-year-old program, which has been largely secret until now, is in addition to the “living wills” the banks crafted to help regulators dismantle them if they actually do fail. It shows how hard regulators are working to ensure that banks have plans for worst-case scenarios and can act rationally in times of distress. …
“Bristol Businesses Queuing Up to Join Local Currency Scheme
“As Britain loses faith in its banks and feels shockwaves from the euro crisis, one city is trying to keep local wealth in local pockets with the launch of its own currency. The Bristol pound – usable only with member businesses in the city in southwest England – is to launch in September, and organisers are deluged with local firms wanting to sign up. …
“Businesses can pay local taxes in Bristol pounds and the council has offered its 17,000 staff the option of receiving part of their pay in the currency. Mundy’s team – funded initially by grants – have designed an electronic system for payments by text message, plus what they say are forgery-proof notes. Stores selling products from cider to skate shoes said they were considering joining the scheme, which Mundy believes will have a tangible economic effect.
“Eighty percent of the money leaves the area if it is spent with a multinational – but 80pc stays if it is spent at a local trader,” he said….”
Including 450 million hollow point bullets, which aren’t even legal to use under international rules of war. The implication is that they’re for domestic use. Of course DHS is a domestic agency.
“The Department of Homeland Security has redacted information relating to the quantity of bullets it is buying following a controversy concerning the agency’s purchase of over a billion rounds of ammo, which many fear is a sign the federal government is preparing for civil unrest in the United States.
It’s kinda surprising they’re waiting for the last minute on this, they could have been buying it slowly over years, starting in the 90’s during clinton, when “they” apparently decided to launch this coup based on a fraudulent war on terror, the successor to the war on communism. (see “OKC Bombing: What you’re not supposed to know” and “WTC Bombing: What you’re not supposed to know” in the reference section) Anything to keep those bucks flowing to the military industrial complex and the banksters who collect the interest payments on the so-called national debt which results from the endless wars that they arrange. It’s an amazing business model.
Anyway, my guess is that their pollsters are discovering that the level of public awareness of what’s going on is expanding exponentially fast via the internet, thus the need for killing mass numbers of people. No problem, they know what to do. Or so they think.
At some point one would think that the brazenness of their criminality would be an embarrassment to them.