+ Reply to Thread
Results 1 to 2 of 2

Thread: BFOL - The Cause of the Economic Meltdown & Bankers "Dancing In The Rain" Over Wall Street Profits

  1. #1
    Join Date
    May 2009

    Default BFOL - The Cause of the Economic Meltdown & Bankers "Dancing In The Rain" Over Wall Street Profits

    BRUSH FIRES ONLINE The Cause of the Economic Meltdown & Bankers "Dancing In The Rain" Over Wall Street Profits


    Date: Sat, 8 Nov 2008 10:31:38 -0500
    From: "John Gerhardt" <brushfires@gmail.com>
    To: "Martin Lindstedt" <mlindste@mo-net.com>
    Subject: The Cause of the Economic Meltdown & Bankers "Dancing In The Rain" Over Wall Street Profits


    "It does not require a majority to prevail, but rather an irate, tireless minority keen to set brush fires in people's minds."
    – Samuel Adams, Father of the American Revolution .

    "The strength and power of despotism consists wholly in the fear of resistance."
    - Thomas Paine

    "One cannot free oneself by bowing to the yoke, but by breaking it."
    - Carl Gustav Jung

    "In an age of universal deceit, telling the truth is a revolutionary act."
    - George Orwell, 1984

    "Never doubt that a small group of thoughtful committed citizens can change the world; indeed it's the only thing that ever has."
    -- Margaret Mead

    "We must secure the existence of our people and a future for White children."
    -- David Lane

    The following is a collection of articles and reports on related and serious issues. The first is by Eli James, a self-employed businessman, a LibRA member for , and a Christian Identity minister with his own prison ministry. He may be contacted at: eli-james@sbcglobal.net
    Pastor James also has his own online radio program, on which I've been a guest a few times. Link to that is:

    The next one is by Louis Beam. In addition to being among the few genuinely serious and sincere pro-Eurofolk leaders, and whose friendship and support during my sojourn as a political prisoner and afterward has always been appreciated. Louis is a former political prisoner in his own right, being the one non-previously convicted defendant in the infamous Fort Smith Sedition Trial of 1988 who was refused bond. Here is a link to his website:

    The third item was also recently circulated by Louis with introductory comments. I'm unsure of the initial source of the fourth report, I got it from Tom Metzger's News & Views, which often includes reports you rarely see elsewhere. My own commentary is last. In it, I will try to put all of this in a perspective in which more of us should consider seeing these matters and will try to offer some possible solutions.



    What Is the Cause of the Economic Meltdown?
    By Pastor Eli James

    Introduction: The Information Meltdown

    I am always amused by mainstream media's shallow coverage of nearly all important news events. More and more independent commentators are realizing that the corporate media rarely tells the truth about anything. Almost all "news," these days, is disinformation. There is a very important reason for this: the corporate media is part of the globalist business world, which means that any particular television network is either owned by another corporation, or contrariwise, the network is the parent company which owns other corporations. With so many corporations in bed with each other, few "news" outlets will report accurately on any serious problems concerning the corporate business world.

    So it is with the banking industry, especially concerning international finance. Banking corporations are often conglomerates that have dealings in shipping, manufacturing, oil, armaments and entertainment. And those corporations that have interlocking boards of directors are keenly aware that controlling negative information about their conglomerate businesses is an important aspect of doing business. The days of the muckraking reporter are over, since much of the time the potential muckraker would be doing an expose about a subsidiary in the conglomerate.

    Banking corporations that own oil corporations that own construction companies that own security companies that own chemical corporations that own media corporations are not going to allow any serious reporting about any aspect of the conglomerate. This is why we no longer have news reports coming from ABC, NBC, CBS, etc. Instead we have infotainment and infomercials. When necessary, we also get soft-peddled saber-rattling against potential enemies of the Corporate State. Serious, detailed commentary about any important subject is a thing of the past. The news media has become as vague as the politician: speaking words that say little or nothing. This is an art form. The old saying calls it "beating around the bush."

    I have long been a critic of global corporations and their tendency to monopolize and control information. And since these corporations have so much power and influence with politicians, few politicians will say anything negative about their financial contributors, especially if they want free publicity. As the planet moves gradually towards becoming ONE BIG CORPORATION, it is understandable that the public relations subsidiary of the ONE BIG CORPORATION is only going to provide sketchy information about any serious economic problems.

    Given these interrelated corporate interests, all "news reporting" has become little more than corporate propaganda. All information coming from these sources has become inadequate. All establishment commentators, with very few exceptions, have become timid; and all reporters know that there are subjects which they cannot broach. In short, if you want the TRUTH about any given subject, your best source of information these days is the internet. The internet has loads of independent people, such as myself, and renegades who have left the corporate sector to blow the whistle on these activities. These independents and renegades are not beholden to any major corporation or the government. I can speak my mind without fear of being fired by the Personnel Division. The renegades may have old friends, who are still employed by the global corporation, that will become their enemies, but they are motivated to tell the truth for the benefit of those who desperately need this information. These alternative sources of information will often name names and reveal scandals that the corporate media cannot possibly touch. If there is something shady going on in the boardroom, the last thing the board members can handle is exposure. Thus, a tight control must be kept on all information, especially news of wrongdoing within the corporate establishment.

    What is the Cause of the Current Economic Meltdown?

    Given the fact that I am completely independent of this Beast System (the global corporate monolith), I can say things that no dependent journalist would dare to say. You will never hear a mainstream media "journalist" say this: The current world economic crisis is a direct result of – are you ready – FREE TRADE. Since FREE TRADE is the pet project of the global economy, its principles and operations cannot be questioned. The fact that, here in America, both the Democrats and Republicans have wholeheartedly supported all of these international trade agreements, neither party is going to question the wisdom of this policy. No politician will dare to question the soundness of Free Trade – not even Barak Obama.

    I have gone on record as saying that Free Trade is a FREE RIDE for the multinational corporations. Critics of Free Trade have seen this day coming; and we have predicted that it will be an irreversible meltdown. Why? Because the international corporations, due to short-term greed and Free Trade, have killed the American economy.

    With the blessing of the United Nations and other international business organizations, what Free Trade has done is to slowly and deliberately put America out of business. How has this happened?

    First of all, there was the shutting down of America's manufacturing sector. International corporations, by moving their manufacturing facilities to cheap labor markets, such as China, India and Mexico, eliminated millions of blue collar jobs in this sector of the economy. With manufacturing facilities being moved out of the country, middle management, supervisory and technical people had to move with the operation…until they could be replaced by newly trained locals.

    After manufacturing moved out of the country, the high tech corporations decided to import computer programmers and technicians from other countries, such as India, to replace American techies who had been paid salaries at three or four times more money. Silicon Valley workers were especially hard hit by this gambit. Big corporations found that they could save money on customer service by employing telephone reps in foreign countries, thus putting more Americans out of work.

    In addition to international corporations, small companies also felt the squeeze, because they simply could not compete against corporations that could produce millions of widgets for a fraction of the cost that a local company could. Such companies faced a disturbing choice: 1.) Either pack up and try to set up shop in another country, or 2.) Go out of business. The American shoe industry died off because of this factor. The steel industry disappeared. The tool and clothing industries began to feel the same pressure. Whole sectors of the economy simply collapsed under the weight of this process of wage deflation and job losses. America's auto industry is next in line, including the numerous small businesses that feed the auto industry with parts and supplies. In order to compete in this global Free Trade market, a company must have access to cheap labor in order to survive. By 2005, nary a product with a "Made in America" tag could be found on any store shelf.

    Initially, this trend toward cheap, outside labor may have had a marginal benefit to the American consumer, as goods produced overseas were slightly cheaper than goods produced by higher-paid American workers. But as more and more Americans were losing their jobs to cheap and slave labor, these cheaper goods were only available to those Americans who still had jobs or those who had money in the bank. As a result of this gradual, relentless exportation of jobs out of America, the international corporations began to see their customer base decline.

    I am a proud, anti-internationalist "isolationist." I have never believed in the Free Trade concept. I saw, from the beginning, that the new international trade agreements, such as GATT and NAFTA, the World Trade Organization, the United Nations Industrial Development Organization, and United Nations Banking operations in the Third World had two particular goals in mind: 1.) To centralize control of trade within the United Nations Organization, thereby making the UN the place where the biggest and best deals could be made, and 2.) To maximize corporate profits by exploiting the world's cheapest labor pools. But only the multinational corporations had access to such sweet deals. National and small businesses in America were out of the loop. There was no way that smaller companies could compete against this international monster.

    Few people seem to realize what a huge role the United Nations Organization plays in promoting third world industrialization. UN loans to these technologically backward countries often go bad, because these countries simply do not have the resources to carry out such plans. In Africa, the petty dictators of these countries often use the UN loan money to lavish themselves with luxurious villas and personal possessions. Rarely – probably never - do such UN loans actually make the debtor country a better place to live.

    It is a historical fact that America became the world's richest nation, not by Free Trade, but by tariffs and protectionism. Until the 1960's, our federal government did a reasonable job of protecting American industries and jobs from foreign competition. Protectionism works like this: Imported goods have a tariff imposed upon them which bring them to the approximate price level of similar American-made goods. Thus, the American consumer has always had a simple choice, to buy American or foreign goods at roughly the same price. It is also a fact that imported goods coming from socialist countries or from government subsidized industries in foreign countries make for unfair competition against American companies that have to risk their own money to stay in business. For these reasons, protectionism and "isolationism" have always benefited American industry and the American worker.

    Free-Traders and internationalists derisively call this system "isolationist," but they will not tell you that this system has always been the best for the American worker. The real reason why the internationalists are opposed to tariffs is because tariffs have always been a barrier to exploiting cheap, foreign labor. So, you can see that such criticism, coming from the international corporations, is nothing but deception motivated by greed.

    Corporate Totalitarianism

    The payoff for the United Nations was and is greater economic control of all markets, as its banking operations, such as the World Bank and the International Monetary Fund, had, since 1947, been in the business of developing third world industry. It was only a matter of time before the UN's third world industrial build-up would result in intense competition against America's manufacturing industry. The irony of this factor is the fact that, of all countries, the American taxpayer has been paying the most money into the coffers of the UN, far more than any other nation. Congress has routinely appropriated "America's share" for financing the UN, while the American people scarcely knew how much or how often. So, while the American people were financing the UN, the UN was laying the groundwork for America's industrial defeat.

    Mary Davison, in her expose of the UN's totalitarian plans, Profound Revolution (1966), had this to say:

    It might be suggested also, that the existing mone*tary systems of the civilized world will not begin to sup*port the world-wide programs of the United Nations and that this is the real reason the International Currency is being prepared for launching. The World Govern*ment, which is the U. N., proposes to issue a WORLD CURRENCY and issue all currency through the World Bank which is a U. N. institution. Still the American people refuse to believe that the United Nations IS A WORLD GOVERNMENT.

    And now we see that the UN's third world industrialization projects have also put Americans out of work, because these projects redirect capital away from our home needs and also exploit cheap labor pools. Thus, the American taxpayer has been paying for the elimination of his own job, which would ultimately be exported to a UN project in a foreign country. It is not an exaggeration to say that the UN takes America's generous subsidies with one hand and stabs us in the back with the other. This is the thanks we get for paying money into the UNO!

    Mary Davison sums up the dilemma in this clear passage;

    It might occur to somebody to ask just why the tax monies of the American Producer should be devoted to the building of oil and gas pipe-lines in these far-off countries. Informed people everywhere know that OIL is cartelist property; those who reap the profits from oil and gas are well able to pay for their own pipe-lines. This should raise the question: WHO WILL OWN THIS PROPERTY in which America has so much invested--THOUSANDS OF MILLIONS of dollars worth of wealth created through OUR TAX MONEY? When we deal with the subject of INDUSTRIALIZATION we are deal*ing with the profit motive. If we pay for all this—who should own it?

    Indeed, US taxpayer money is being used by the UN to make international corporations rich(er).

    Free Enterprise, the Goose That Lays the Golden Eggs, is the Exact Opposite of "Free Trade"

    For much of the Twentieth Century, America was the world's economic engine. We led the world in technology, innovation, efficiency, planning, design and construction…you name it. As America developed into this economic powerhouse, our labor force was the most highly skilled and best compensated work force the world had ever seen. America's middle class was made up of these workers. The labor unions had extracted good pension plans and health insurance premiums from the corporations as well. This is the American System, known to all the world as "Free Enterprise." This is the economic system that is possible only under the United States Constitution, which is a nationalistic, protectionist document. Unfortunately, corporate lawyers have undermined the intent of the US Constitution, and we have entered the phase of Global Governance: government by lawyers, bankers and other thieves.

    As the second and third worlds began to produce similar goods at less cost, American corporations consciously planned on eliminating these costs, as Third World corporations could produce the same products for far less in labor costs. Also, with advanced mechanization, the high-skill workers could be replaced with low-skill workers, thus reducing labor costs even more. The multinational corporations had to be able to get around America's Constitutional protections against exploitation by international organizations. Enter "Free Trade."

    The promoters of Free Trade unequivocally sold their system to the American public as a potential gold mine of economic opportunity for Americans. All the newspapers, all the bankers, all the politicians (Democratic and Republican) and all the economists told us what a great thing "internationalism" is compared to "isolationism." Conservative critics couldn't get a word of criticism into the mainstream press. Now we are seeing the fruit of their policies: destruction of the American economy.

    Free Trade has led to a predictable circumstance: By eliminating America's jobs, Free Trade was also eliminating the American consumer. Only a dimwit would fail to understand that a consumer has to have an income in order to be a consumer. The American consumer, now having lost his job and his income – thanks to Free Trade – cannot buy the cheaper goods that Free Trade produces. Free Trade is self-destructing as we speak!

    The inevitable time has arrived when Americans are losing their jobs at such a fast pace that they can no longer afford the cheapest goods that China can make. The goods no longer move off the store shelves. More and more retail businesses are closing…and the recession – I mean Depression - is on. I am guaranteeing a world-wide depression unless Free Trade is abandoned and Free Enterprise (the American System) is reinstituted. "Free Trade" is killing the goose that lays the golden eggs.

    The End Game

    As I have explained many times to my radio show listeners, the only sector of the American economy that has been working at full capacity during the last decade was the housing market. Since new homes had to be built on American soil, there was no way that the corporations could export the jobs of the construction workers. The very nature of real estate is its location. The only way to keep construction costs down in this area is to import cheap labor; and that's what the illegal aliens from Mexico provided. The Big Banks, having no loyalty to America or the US Constitution, encouraged illegal aliens to enter America by enticing them with low-interest loans. With the housing market declining, these "immigrants" would, hopefully, also become potential home-buyers. This would keep the housing market going.

    In 2006, hurricanes Katrina and Rita also gave a boost to the construction industry, as the nation's construction labor pool was kept working by rebuilding the southern coast.

    But America's housing construction boom was fast approaching its Waterloo: overbuilding. It was only a question of time when America would run out of buyers for existing real estate. The industry had a dilemma. Do we quit building and keep the price of housing steady? Or, do we keep building and hope that prices don't fall? The second alternative was the only real choice. Since only the housing market was keeping Americans working, it would be suicide to stop building. If we have to go bust, let it be in the future and not immediately. But the day of reckoning has finally arrived. Overbuilding and a lack of buyers have caused the housing market to collapse, along with the banks and loan companies that were supplying the money to potential buyers. EVERYBODY SAW THIS COMING, but nobody could do anything about it, because housing was the only industry that was keeping people employed; and everybody was hoping against hope that some kind of fix could keep the industry working.

    Not to be, however.

    In March of this year (2008), Ben Bernanke, Chairman of the Federal Reserve Board, made his speech in Washington, stating,

    "Far too much of the lending in recent years was neither responsible nor prudent. The terms of some subprime mortgages permitted homebuyers and investors to purchase properties beyond their means, often with little or no equity. In addition, abusive, unfair or deceptive lending practices led some borrowers into mortgages that they would not have chosen knowingly."


    To blame mortgage companies for trying to sell homes in this market is like criticizing the hot dog vendor for selling hot dogs after the baseball game is over. Although there were some newcomers who took advantage of the increased business provided by low interest rates, most of these companies were just trying to survive, just like the construction companies, service companies and skilled labor, who were all being employed by the housing industry. It's like criticizing a drowning man for grasping at a life preserver.


    I COULD SEE RIGHT THROUGH Bernanke's lies; and I smelled the putrid smell of his phony accusations; and I wanted to punch him in the face for such an obvious shifting of blame. It was a convenient excuse for deflecting responsibility from himself and his internationalist corporate business partners. Perhaps a few people actually believed his statement! But few people seem to understand that the Federal Reserve System is in total control of our economy. The Fed determines how much money there is in circulation. They can boom the economy or bust it by how much money they create at any given time. ALL ECONOMISTS KNOW THIS.

    I have spent thirty-five years in the home remodeling field, so I know what drives the housing industry, from the nuts and bolts to the big money. The major driving force of housing prices, since World War II, has been inflation. Real Estate, until now, has always been the best hedge against inflation. Real Estate tends to keep or improve its value, especially if the population increases. In Chicago, a house purchased in 1960 for $30,000 could be sold in 2000 for $500,000 – and that's without making any improvements to the house!!! That's quite a hedge against inflation. As long as the rest of the economy remains fairly stable, the value of real estate will always increase along with the inflation rate. All property investors know this. This is why they invest in real estate.

    But, in the ought years (2000-2008) of this New Millennium, the Federal Reserve Board has been spending fiat money like Weimar Germany. Why? To finance the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan. There are two ways to finance a war: by printing fiat money or by raising taxes. The last thing George Bush wanted to do was tell the American people, "We have to go to war against Iraq, and I'm going to have to raise your taxes to do so." This would have made the war even harder to sell. So Bush and his internationalist banker friends knew that they could pay Bechtel, Haliburton, Blackwater and all of these other insider corporations with fiat money. Inflation is an invisible tax, as the economists say.

    All bankers know that financing a war with fiat money will create tremendous inflation. The Fed, the Neo-Kahns and George Bush, in a fit of overconfidence, assumed that Iraq would be an easy kill, so that the fiat money required would be negligible. They were wrong. Five years later, we are still embroiled in that fiasco and there appears to be no way out. In the meantime the Federal Reserve Note (US dollar) is being inflated into worthlessness, to the point where few nations or non-American corporations are willing to accept the Fed's monetary issue. So, we are now experiencing a double whammy: the collapse of the housing market and high inflation due to financing the war with fiat money.

    What's the solution?

    There is only one way to end this crisis: End the war and put Americans back to work IN AMERICA. I am not a university-trained economist, but I do know how to put America back to work. This is actually very easy: Put the construction industry back to work by rebuilding America's collapsing infrastructure. This is how Hitler revived the German economy after the Weimar collapse. Hitler actually took his cue from Abraham Lincoln's Greenbacks, which Lincoln circulated as NATIONAL MONEY, as opposed to banker's money, which the North would have had to borrow at a rate of 28% interest!!!! This is what Roosevelt should have done more of during the Great Depression. Building a few dams hardly got the economy going again. It was the WWII industrial build-up that got America out of the Great Depression.

    If America can spend money blowing people to smithereens in Iraq, it can spend money at home paying workers to build bridges, pave highways, repair sewers, ENLARGE THE LEVEES IN NEW ORLEANS, etc. etc. etc. But, of course, this makes too much sense. No Free Trader is interested in doing this, because it would expose the failure of their internationalist policies.

    In addition, it seems that the Zionists and internationalists are not as concerned about reviving America's economy as the American people are. Their goal has been to gain total control of the Middle East oil supply, and so they are not even thinking in terms of putting America back to work. They have their priorities. We have ours. America, do you realize how you are being betrayed?

    All I can do is suggest this solution; but the politics of world oil and the Arab-Israeli conflict is currently more important to these internationalists than our collapsing economy. If these idiots in charge don't get the message soon, the American people will soon be in the grip of a GREATER DEPRESSION, that will make 1929-1939 look like a church picnic.

    In His Name,

    Pastor Eli James

    (Please share this essay with every free citizen you know)



    Liberty Rights Advocates
    P.O. Box 713
    Johnstown, OH 43031

    or donate online Liberty Rights Advocates
    I am The Librarian

  2. #2
    Join Date
    May 2009

    Default BFOL -- Bankers "Dancing in the rain" Over Wall Street Profits - Louis Beam

    BFOL -- Bankers "Dancing in the rain" Over Wall Street Profits
    by Louis Beam



    A quote to consider about the current market meltdown from the website http://www.urbansurvival.com/week.htm

    I seem to recall that Hank Greenberg, who largely built AIG (and who claimed in a TV interview Tuesday that AIG was a "national treasure") was a ranking bigwig in the Council on Foreign Relations - you know, that group which is pushing for a North American trading block and the agenda of http://www.spp.gov - which has never been voted on in CONgress?

    Am I the only one that recalls that Greenberg served as Chairman of the CFR's Task Force on Terrorist Financing? (See acknowledgements, p. 6).

    Why do I mention this? Only to inject a little perspective into the discussion. Because media slobbers to print jingoisms, an indigenous person on his own land, protecting his own family from Western/corporate takeover of the natural resources under his foot is called (depending on who's doing the writing) either a 'freedom fighter' or a 'terrorist.'

    But, here's the thing: While you and I would likely agree that someone strapping a bomb onto their body and stepping aboard a loaded bus - full of innocents - is a terrorist, when the world's biggest insurance company straps so much questionable and explosive derivative paper on itself and threatens to blow itself up and destroy the whole global financial system, isn't that terrorism, too?

    Yes of course it is terrorism, but the government goes to the rescue of the banker terrorist in this case using your money, and deflating the value of your savings, car, home, bank account, and anything else you may own. Those in the federal government abetting this economic terrorism should be indicted for their crimes against the people of this country and quickly hanged for the billions they have stolen from the U.S. taxpayers.



    What A Real Terrorist Would Do?



    Bankers "Dancing in the rain" Over Wall Street Profits

    Those bankers who will profit from their financial crimes on wall street are to many to list, but here are a few of them.

    The list of those who will profit from the bailouts and derivatives markets include ousted managers like ex-Bear Stearns Cos. President Warren Spector, who sold $382 million in stock before resigning in 2007. He was spotted dancing in the rain during a New York staging of "Hair'' last month.

    From his start 13 years ago as a trading assistant on the firm's government bond desk, Mr. Spector has ascended to head of Bear Stearns' fixed-income operations, where he oversees $10 billion in trades each day. His tenure at the legendary trading firm has been a steady progression, paralleling the growth in derivatives. In 1987, the Chevy Chase, Md., native headed the mortgage derivative trading unit as that area exploded, growing the business from 10 traders to a staff of 300 today. Mr. Spector extended his reach to other fixed-income areas, taking on the government bond department in 1992. The following year, he started a derivatives group with a handful of employees, now a Triple A subsidiary with a staff of 150.


    Also making millions:

    Henry Kaufman, a Lehman Brothers Holdings Inc. director who earned that nickname for his 1970s forecasts as an economist, made almost $2 million when he exercised Lehman stock options in December and January, after the firm reported record fiscal 2007 net income.

    Kaufman's profit-saving sale shows there are some winners among the losing firms in this week's Wall Street meltdown. Another is Thomas Montag, a Merrill Lynch & Co. executive hired only a month before the firm negotiated its sale, who stands to get $76 million.

    Henry Kaufman
    Born: c. 1927
    Birthplace: Germany
    Gender: Male
    Race or Ethnicity: Jewish
    Occupation: Business
    Nationality: United States
    Executive summary: Ex Managing Director, Salomon Brothers
    University: BA, New York University
    University: MS Finance, Columbia University
    University: PhD, Stern School of Business
    Administrator: Trustee, New York University
    Administrator: Board of Overseers, Stern School of Business (as Chairman, past)
    Administrator: Board of Governors, Tel-Aviv University
    Henry Kaufman & Co. President (1988-)
    Salomon Brothers including as Managing Director (1962-88)
    Federal Reserve Bank of New York Economist (-1962)
    Federal Reserve Bank of New York International Advisory Board
    Member of the Board of Freddie Mac
    Member of the Board of Lehman Brothers (1995-)
    Animal Medical Center Trustee
    Bill Bradley for President
    Economic Club of New York
    Institute of International Education Trustee (as Chairman, past)
    Statue of Liberty-Ellis Island Foundation Board of Directors
    Whitney Museum of American Art Trustee

    Thomas Montag

    (RTTNews) - In a filing with the US Securities and Exchange Commission, Merrill Lynch & Co. disclosed that it will be paying an annual salary of $600,000 and a bonus of $39.4 million for fiscal year 2008 to Thomas Montag, who will be joining the company in August 2008 to serve as Executive Vice President and Head of Global Sales and Trading.

    $252m for less than a year's work in total? Thank you, Mr Merrill

    Jonathan Keehner and Bradley Keoun, New York
    September 18, 2008

    MERRILL Lynch & Co chief executive John Thain and two former Goldman Sachs Group colleagues he recruited may reap almost $US200 million ($A252 million) for their year running Merrill if they leave or are given lesser roles after Bank of America buys the brokerage.

    Mr Thain, who got a $US15 million bonus when hired in December, stands to get an additional $US11 million in accelerated stock payouts if he doesn't stay after the deal. Trading chief Thomas Montag, who joined last month, may get $US76 million including bonus and accelerated awards. Strategy head Peter Kraus was given $US95 million including bonus and stock awards to replace a Goldman package he forfeited.

    Wall Street Bankers Gathered at UJA-Federation Dinner fearful of discussing bonuses from Wall Street.

    More than 1,000 financial professionals gathered at the Hilton Hotel in midtown Manhattan for the UJA-Federation of New York's annual Wall Street Dinner. Old lions and Young Turks held conversations and sipped cocktails at the gathering, which raised $21.6 million for the social services group.
    DealBook was on hand for the festivities. Pictures and more after the jump.


    "Held since the 1970s, the dinner aims to recognize support for the UJA, which provides charitable services in New York and shows support for Israel. This year, the stars were Richard A. Friedman, a managing director of Goldman Sachs who received the Gustave L. Levy Award, and Larry Robbins, the head of the hedge fund Glenview Capital Management, who received the Young Leadership Award.

    "It's truly a privilege to be associated with the UJA," Mr. Robbins told DealBook, after describing the 10 years of support he has given the group. "I'm a little embarrassed by the attention, but I'm so proud to be part of the UJA family."

    Daniel S. Och, the head of newly public Och-Ziff Capital Management, was on hand as the event's dinner chair. Gary D. Cohn of Goldman Sachs, Marc Lasry of Avenue Capital Management and Eric Mindich of Eton Park Capital Management — all longtime supporters of the organization — were there too.
    Arthur Samberg, the head of Pequot Capital Management, attended as the senior chair of the UJA's Wall Street division. And Alan C. Greenberg, the former chairman of Bear Stearns, was too as a longtime supporter of the group. In fact, the dinner is held annually on the first Wednesday of December because it is the same day Bear Stearns tells its executives the size of their annual bonuses.

    In light of Wall Street's losses this year, no one we spoke to wanted to comment on the size of his or her bonus. But in something approaching irony, the event's guests included Warren J. Spector, the former Bear Stearns co-president who was ousted this summer over steep losses related to subprime mortgages. "He has been a longtime supporter of UJA," Larry Nathan of the UJA's Wall Street division told DealBook. "No matter his affiliation, he has shown his support."

    The UJC was formed from the 1999 merger of United Jewish Appeal (UJA), Council of Jewish Federations (CJF), and United Israel Appeal (UIA)


    Here's an example of what corporate executives did with some of the bail out money they got:


    Who are these corporate executives backing for President? Not who some of you may think. A list of top campaign contributors for Obama include those involved in the Wall Street bail out:


    Fannie Mae's corporate CEO addressing black congressional caucus with Michele Obama present:


    "Affirmative action" mortgages by Fannie Mae count for a considerable amount of the bad debt?



    Tent City Boom: Hard Times for White Folks

    Line up .... . ... for food.

    "Stay home! We don't have any more jobs than you do!!"

    From Seattle to Athens, Ga., homeless advocacy groups and city agencies are reporting the most visible rise in homeless encampments in a generation.

    "It's clear that poverty and homelessness have increased," said Michael Stoops, acting executive director of the coalition. "The economy is in chaos, we're in an unofficial recession and Americans are worried, from the homeless to the middle class, about their future."

    Beach bums. Cold a comin'

    The relatively tony city of Santa Barbara has given over a parking lot to people who sleep in cars and vans. The city of Fresno, Calif., is trying to manage several proliferating tent cities, including an encampment where people have made shelters out of scrap wood. In Portland, Ore., and Seattle, homeless advocacy groups have paired with nonprofits or faith-based groups to manage tent cities as outdoor shelters. Other cities where tent cities have either appeared or expanded include include Chattanooga, Tenn., San Diego, and Columbus, Ohio.

    In Seattle, which is experiencing a building boom and an influx of affluent professionals in neighborhoods the working class once owned, homeless encampments have been springing up -- in remote places to avoid police sweeps.

    "What's happening in Seattle is what's happening everywhere else -- on steroids," said Tim Harris, executive director of Real Change, an advocacy organization that publishes a weekly newspaper sold by homeless people.

    Sylvia Flynn, 51, came from northern California but lost a job almost immediately and then her apartment. Since the cheapest motels here charge upward of $200 a week, Flynn ended up at the Reno women's shelter, which has only 20 beds and a two-week limit on stays.


    I remember a news report in 1980 in which the then CEO of General Motors, joining in with a slowly rising chorus that Americans somehow had it too good and were being paid too much, sneeringly pontificated to the media, "Americans don't need to buy a new car every year." For generations, it was standard for businesses to view the way to increase profits was by increasing production. That worked very well for a very long time, but that business strategy was being replaced by another one. The current corporate view is that the way to increase profits is to no longer bother with increasing production but to simply cut costs. Wages and salaries of those employed by these corporations are no longer even thought of by corporate executives as being the livelihoods of their employees but are only viewed as their "costs."

    The 80's would become a decade of aggressive, ruthless wage cutting moves, from union busting to the beginnings of massive illegal immigration by those who corporate bosses enticed to come as cheap labor. That decade was to see the first of what CEO's and owners of huge corporations apparently want to be a continuing non stop series of amnesty for successive waves of illegal aliens. Then, by the end of that decade, around 1991, came the announcement, again from GM's CEO, that a number of GM plants across America had to be shut down. Why? The CEO complained that Americans just weren't buying as many new cars as they used to. A decade of reducing income for a growing number of Eurofolk Americans, to where fewer could afford to buy new cars, then this jerk complains that fewer were buying new cars. A bit short sighted in his greed, wasn't he? Evidently nothing was learned by the experience.

    That decade would not see the end of this insanity. With the 90's came NAFTA, the first "free trade" job exporting agreement. And before anyone blames the Republicans--it was during the Democrat Clinton administration at a time when Congress was majority Democrat that this was strongarmed into law over the objections of many who were able to take one look at it and see the inevitable results. What Ross Perot called the "giant sucking sound" of American jobs going to Mexico. One can't help but be a little jaded when, later, one would hear complaints of Mexicans losing cheap paying jobs as they were re-exported to even cheaper labor in China, as these "free trade" agreements were expanded.

    Displaced American workers were told to learn skills in newer jobs or occupations, such as in the growing computer industry. Many did that--only to be displaced again as greedy corporate bosses began importing employees from India who would work for even lower wages. The excuse used to sell approval of this blatant dispossession of yet more Eurofolk Americans (a number of whom had already been previously displaced), was the spin that there was supposedly a "shortage" of workers for this industry. Whenever you hear corporate CEO's or their politician lap dogs say there is a "shortage" of workers, what they mean is that there is a shortage, not in the total number of qualified American workers, but in the number of American workers willing to work for lousy wages too low to enable them to support themselves and their families. Read between the lines of spin of those spouting the excuse to import cheap, job stealing immigrant labor--illegal or otherwise--with the allegation "they do jobs Americans won't do." No, there have always been Americans willing to do the work, they were just not willing to do it for inadequate poverty level or lower wages-- unless compelled to out of the desperation imposed upon them by big multi national corporations and their policies.

    This drive to aggressively lower the incomes and standard of living of ever more of our Eurofolk Americans continued into this decade. While the standard of living of more has declined, while real wages (after adjustments for inflation) have either stagnated or declined for ever more of our people, the profits of big corporations and the salaries and other income for big corporate executives grew to obscene levels proportionate to what the average employee was paid or, more accurately,forced to accept. Look at the outrageous "severance pay" and bonuses listed above for corporate executives who are direct or indirect beneficiaries of the bail out.

    The often used rationalization for "free trade" that "less costly goods" are made available to Americans rings hollow when the decrease in income, the decline in standard of living, gets to the point that fewer can afford to buy even imported cheap items made with virtual or actual foreign slave labor. We hear the complaint that credit was extended too easily to too many who weren't making enough to be able to pay credit and loans. For an ever growing number of our people, less could be purchased by cash payments without credit because continued inflation and declining incomes made it impossible to do so. But leave it to greedy usury lenders to think like all over greedy corporate bosses. Come up with the con of flexible interest rates, then increase interest rates and minimum monthly payments, to the point that even the minimum payments can't be met. Do this to enough people and we end up with--what's this--mounting bad debts and a rise in bankrupties even after Congress enacted "reform" laws to make it more difficult to file bankrupcy?

    The bail out does nothing for those with mortgages they have been made unable to continue to pay, nor for anyone else with debt of any kind. What it does is buy out this debt from the original creditors while the debts are still owed. This really isn't anything new. For a long time corporations have sold their bad debts to others, who then go after the debtor to pay them rather than the original creditor. How many reading this have had the experience, or know someone who has, of out of the blue some collections outfit sending a notice that they want to be paid for some debt incurred to someone other than them, with the debt invariably inflated to an amount higher than the original loan? The notice always states that if the one receiving this doesn't contact them within 30 days to dispute the debt, it will be assumed the debt is valid and legal. The reason for this statement is that, under current federal law, if some claimed debt from some outfit like that goes unchallenged, it is considered by law to be legally valid and legally owed. Demand a copy of the original bill upon which the debt is supposedly based, and seldom will they be able to produce it. (Despite some continued threat, if a copy of an original bill is demanded, eventually they'll have to back off because they won't be able to sue. If the validity of a debt is challenged in a court of law, the court will want to see documentation or the original bill before it rules in favor of the alleged creditor. Most of the time all they have is a note for a debt sold by one corporation to another, some times for pennies on the dollar. (If you or someone you know ever receives anything like this--and with a worsening economy more will be forced to default on some debt--always respond right away and demand a copy of the original bill upon which the alleged debt is based--because if you fail to do so legally you are assumed to have confimed the valdity of the debt.) What the bail out does is have the federal government buy this debt rather than a private collections company, so they or whoever they designate will hound the debtor rather than a private debt collector. (Only one candidate proposes to renegotiate mortgages bought by this bail out to enable Eurofolk Americans to stay in their homes rather than be foreclosed on:


    Could this "maverick" way of thinking be one of the reasons the corporate media, and corporate executives with their contributions, seem to favor Obama over McCain?)

    I'm sure I'm not the only one whose inbox has been filled with commentary and reports related to the bail out and the economic crisis which led to it, and hear people discussing it. Outside the controlled media, out here in the real world away from TV "pc" land, contrary to how the corporate media portrays it, there doesn't seem to be anyone in favor of the bail out. Some times the corporate controlled media is unable to completely filter out what they don't want us to hear. This past week, nightly on the Tonight Show Jay Leno has been having running jokes about the economy and the banks. Such as why they never call a crash a crash but instead a "correction." Like the one about covering a race and a car crashes and they say, "Look at that fiery correction." Then, when he said, "Why do they call it a correction? They belong in a correctional institution," there was a spontaneous outburst of enthusiastic applause greater than I've seen for any comment on any talk show like that in a long time. Not surprisingly a mass protest against the bail out on Wall Street did not get much coverage, which you can see here:


    How many reading this would argue with the proposition that every person is entitled to enjoy the fruits of their labor, that everyone has a right to benefit from the product of their labor? How many times have you seen supposedly "smart" rants by someone professing conservative principles, more often than not some upper class corporate type, such as the one which circulates every now and then quoting some corporate big shot as saying, among other things, that no one has a right to a decent income or something like that? This rant continues to circulate because so many mindlessly pass it on, assuming the speaker was talking about minorities or someone just entering the work force but wanting it all now, or someone else, when he was really speaking about you.

    You have no right to a decent standard of living or to a decent income? Oh? If a corporation employs you, and because of your work and the work of fellow employees, that corporation profits, is that profit not the fruit, the product, of your labor, at least as much as it is of the corporate executives? If corporate executives can have ever increasing incomes from the profits of their corporations due partially if not mostly to your labor -- the fruit or product of your labor -- should you not also be entitled to an increase in income, a real increase as well as one on paper after fancy adjusting for inflation? Do you not have a right, then, to a decent standard of living? Even if the corporate bosses are paid only 10-20-30 times more than you (not that uncommon not all that long ago) rather than 50-100 times or more? If the increase and rise in standard of living which you have earned as the fruit of your labor is denied to you, is taken from you, hasn't the one taking it from you stolen it from you?

    Now if the same corporate executive, already getting way more than you, takes your job, your income, and gives it to someone else, some non-Eurofolk "affirmative action" employee or, worse, some third world interloper brought here to be given your job but with a considerably lower wage, or even yet worse exports your job to someone in some third world country for an even a lower wage, would it not justified to refer to those taking the job from you, as job stealing cheap labor? When someone steals something from someone else, aren't those who do the stealing called thieves? Wouldn't it be justified, then, to consider and view not only the job stealing third world interloper but also the corporate executive who took that job from you or from another Eurofolk American, and who thus deprives you of a decent standard of living to which your work should entitle you, as nothing else but thieves?

    The greedy policies of the corporate elite inflict damages which cannot really be measured in terms of dollars and cents. Import enough third world cheap labor in an area and you inevitably end up with another third world area in which Eurofolk Americans are pushed out and made to feel like foreigners in their own country. Combined with other policies, there is the dispossession of Eurofolk Americans. Start training yourselves to see a whole picture rather than a partial one. To see what is not there as well as what is. When you see some non-Eurofolk in some position in any business, or any government agency for that matter, realize that you are not only seeing that non-Eurofolk face, you are also not seeing the Eurofolk face which would be there if that position hadn't been given to the non-Eurofolk. There is a ripple effect caused by each displacement of any of our own. Unemployed or under employed? No decent paying job for you regardless of education or other qualification because corporations can get away with forcing people in to low wage jobs they would just as soon give to non-Eurofolk? Why are there so few decent paying jobs available any more? Could the corporate executive faces you see, and the non-Eurofolk faces of those they employ at lower wages rather than the Eurofolk faces you would otherwise see in those positions, be one of the reasons why? Could some of the Eurofolk faces you should see where instead you see non-Eurofolk ones be in reports like the final one above, if not now perhaps in the not too distant future?

    A story from my family history. Back in the early days of the Great Depression, in the very early 30's, there were no jobs anywhere. No welfare or unemployment compensation, no medicaid, no food stamps, either. Like so many, my grandfather was growing more desperate to find a way to feed the family. One day he decided to go up and down various highways collecting scrap metal junk along the road sides. He sold the scrap metal for about 75 cents. (In those days, 75 cents was worth a lot more than it is now.) With that he bought a truck load of vegatables, sold the vegatables for a profit, took the profit, bought more, sold that, buying more in ever increasing quantities. Doing this he built a business of his own. I remember seeing this business, still in operation, when I was a little kid, in the late 50's or early 60's. It was called a fruit stand, but it was way more than some baskets on a picnic table under a tent awning one sees these days which are called fruit stands. It was large enough to be comparable to any mom and pop grocery store of the day (big supermarket chains were just then beginning to come into vogue). There were no jobs available, so my grandfather created his own job by creating his own business.

    Within the past decade, I've known of several ex-prisoners who had to likewise be ambitious and innovative enough to create their own jobs. There was and remains intense discrimination against ex-felons, a refusal by many to hire them even for jobs with lousy wages. One scrounged until he was able to obtain a truck. Then he went around the wealthier neighborhoods and contracted to haul away what they considered their junk. He would go through what he was paid to haul away, clean up what was salvagable (which from wealthy neighborhoods some times was most of what he had just been paid to haul away), and sell the items. Some times he came across antiques and collectibles which sold for way more than what he was paid to haul it away. Another had a knack for computers and developed computer skills which, among other things, enabled her to build websites, which she did as a business out of her home. She used to say "I'm gainfully unemployed." I've known of a few "jail house lawyers" who after release freelanced as paralegals. I could mention several other examples. Almost every one worked out of their homes, none were rich and occasionally were barely scraping by (which few know is also true of many small business owners), but all had created their own jobs rather than perpetually run around in circles from one job to another with periods of ever lengthening unemployment in between because so few would hire ex-prisoners.

    I'm telling you these true stories to make a point. Almost none of those in the examples I mention created their own jobs because they wanted to, but because they had to. As they have done, many more will have to find ways to create their own jobs to enable them to earn their own living, without continuing to be dependant upon an ever more unreliable and shrinking corporate job market.

    Finally, we can no longer afford the continued time wasting, lets pretend games playing non-sense too many of those claiming to be pro-Eurofolk "leaders" or groups seem to be only capable of. Needed is something potentially more effective in approach to enable us to stand up for our rights. LibRA is having successes, is being increasingly more effective and respected, and is among the too few who are. As support for our association grows, as more become actively involved, we will be able to do more and in areas in which our people are being deprived of our rights than just in prisoner advocacy and political prisoner support. Isn't it time for more of you to become involved in or at least support something which is proving itself to be among the few who are capable of seriously standing up for the rights of our own?

    John W Gerhardt, Chief Advocate
    Liberty Rights Advocates
    PO Box 713
    Johnstown, OH 43031


    The name of our e-newsletter, Brush Fires Online, is taken from our membership newsletter, Brush Fires, which was inspired by the Sam Adams quote you often see us use. We give our political prisoners a forum for their own articles and reports, and this forum is also available to other prisoners who are also LibRA members who are taking a stand against tyranny. In addition to reports on LibRA activities, articles and reports by "free world" LibRA activists will be shared with those on this list. As we grow in strength and resources, we will also address civil liberties, civil rights, constitutional rights issues effecting our Eurofolk people outside America's gulags. Those not on this list can be added upon request by contacting us at brushfires@gmail.com. Better yet, if you are finally ready to actively participate in something positive and effective, become an associate member of LibRA and be part of a growing network of active advocates.




    Liberty Rights Advocates
    P.O. Box 713
    Johnstown, OH 43031

    or donate online Liberty Rights Advocates
    I am The Librarian

+ Reply to Thread

Tags for this Thread

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts