FAQ   Search   Memberlist   Usergroups   Register   Profile   Log in to check your private messages   Log in 
9/11 Deja Vu : The Audios. The Analysis.
Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3 ... 16, 17, 18 ... 35, 36, 37  Next
 
Post new topic   Reply to topic    The Next Level Forum Index -> General Discussion
  ::  Previous topic :: Next topic  
Author Message
skinters



Joined: 07 Sep 2009
Posts: 511

PostPosted: Sat Mar 27, 2010 4:41 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Quote:
And I'm doing it for non-tinfoil people with open minds and deep
suspicions or convictions about the 9/11 events --to provide them
with detailed, specific arguments in support of their concerns, so
that they can persuade many others and do something about it.


And this is me exactly.

I dont want to pretend this or that and throw names in like confetti at a wedding,i have the highest respect for how this is being dealt with,always taking it futher,more detailed.

Along with that,less confusing,and the players out for all to see.

I have to give a good nod to Hombre as well,its not easy as i cannot even get started.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
bri



Joined: 16 Jun 2006
Posts: 3139
Location: Capacious Creek

PostPosted: Sun Mar 28, 2010 1:30 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Wish we were in this mindset in 2001-2009 but so it goes.
Now is now. We needed the lesson. Funny how history is working out.
Aren't we "the people" about the only hope? Wink
Vagueness is the main blockade in perp identification..


Last edited by bri on Sun Mar 28, 2010 2:12 pm; edited 1 time in total
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Hombre



Joined: 07 Jan 2008
Posts: 967

PostPosted: Sun Mar 28, 2010 7:54 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Quote:
Call me an idiot, call me what you will but TRUST ME FOLKS---If you think Warren and his circle of friends DOESN'T know what really happened on 9-11 then you need to come out from under the ether before you suffocate.


I said KNOWS about it, if not ALL of the particulars, surely some of them. I did not indicate that Warren was in on it, especially from an OPERATIONAL standpoint, yet I'm sure he did indeed PROFIT from it.

Now if you want to say: " WELL knowing about it and not stopping it, or telling someone " is as good as being INVOLVED in it, then by all means have that opinion. Time will tell as to whether or not there will even be a Grand Jury assembled to deal with this sort of, ( I'll call it a thing )

Fintan: I agree with much of what you've laid out, it's the detail that is giving me pause, especially the connection to sooooooo many elements within certain administrations, groups, organizations ETC.

People in general shy away from Nazi's, if not from stigma, then surely from ignorance. If you care to educate people in that regard then I will admit that being a good thing, especially if it clears some of the haze in regard to the topic at hand.

You traced Hank Paulson back to Nixon. Am I to assume that you think Paulson and Goldman, his employer at the time of 9-11, KNEW about it, or has he not be officially named as of yet?

Can I ask about Richard Myers and what he knew? Is it possible that such a thing could take place on the soil he's responsible for defending without his knowledge, without even having a clue?

Now I know you think Papa Bush KNEW, maybe even orchestrated it. Is this safe to say, or has he not been officially named as of yet?

Here's something I saw ( WITNESSED ) First had a year ago Sept in Louisville KY at the Ryder Cup. Papa with fully ( FULLY ) 6 Body guards-- I was within 10 feet of all of them for a few minutes. 4 Golf carts. One driving Bush, One standing in the bag hold on back of the cart, and flanked by 4 others riding in two other carts. Laughing Laughing

Most everyone in the Crowd near by NEVER said a word accept for one guy standing next to me, one guy. NO I'll not repeat what the guy said.

What's the point: Laughing Laughing The Bush Sr VEE-P Came to my club a while back to play a round of golf with a guy I know very well and his usual playing partners. NOT ONE TAG ALONG BODY GUARD, not one local ride and watch off duty Deputy. I was hitting balls on the range 10 feet from Dan. He's a decent ball striker but one real quite guy, a bit of a stuffed shirt if you know what I mean. Anyway it is indeed a very small world in some respects, but what Papa needs with all that security is something I'll never understand. It's just curious to me that the PTB would be so arrogant as to think that anyone,who's anyone, or NO ONE, really gives a damn about George Bush Sr.

Hombre'
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Fintan
Site Admin


Joined: 18 Jan 2006
Posts: 7597

PostPosted: Sun Mar 28, 2010 1:26 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Quote:
Hombre:
I said KNOWS about it, if not ALL of the particulars, surely
some of them. I did not indicate that Warren was in on it

Sorry. As Amanda Keller said: "My bad"
I didn't read what you said carefully.
Your points on the shares are key.

Quote:
Hombre:
Time will tell as to whether or not there will even be
a Grand Jury assembled to deal with this

As you mention that, we can certainly get an analysis to the stage
at which it is robust and grounded enough to be put to a Grand Jury.

Because (as with JFK) the Jury is the public
and the Court is the court of public opinion.

The perps weren't charged in the case of JFK, but the quality of the case
has been enough to convince most people. And when you convince a
significant number people about something, it alters their political view
and that alters the course of a whole society.

Quote:
Hombre:
People in general shy away from Nazi's, if not from stigma....

It's a shocker, yes. And it grounds us in actual history since 1945.

(Sidenote: Just because the 'winners' adopted the Nazi human resources
infrastructure doesn't mean they are classic Nazi's. Even back then the
ideology was a plausible surface means to an end: Power.)

Quote:
Hombre:
You traced Hank Paulson back to Nixon. Am I to assume that you think
Paulson and Goldman, his employer at the time of 9-11, KNEW about it,
or has he not be officially named as of yet?

Well, it's like detectives on a murder case. Step 1 is to get the context.
Find out did the decased have a will? Who benefited? etc,

Now Paulson is our prime link potentially implicating Wall St. When it
comes to Goldman, clearly Lloyd Blankfein as CEO deserves attention.
As does David Vinar who moved them out of sub-prime at the right time.
Names to be chalked up for further inquiry. Ditto Myers, and Gen Tommy
Franks, Larry Silverstein to name some. Like any murder investigation,
it's a question of directing limited resources of investigation on likely
core conspirators.

As to Bush Snr? Don't get me started. Laughing

_________________
Minds are like parachutes.
They only function when open.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail Visit poster's website
Big Boss



Joined: 04 May 2008
Posts: 822
Location: Outer Heaven

PostPosted: Sun Mar 28, 2010 2:07 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

I'll be damned lol, and here I play most of these games, but very interesting (or dare I say threatening) when you're not part of the unwashed crowd...check THIS out guys...

http://breachgame.com/

Talk about 'training' for a new age of black ops specialists, even in your own g'damned home....but of course this has been going on for some time, but now it is even more blatant when you have the developer of military and intelligence games working on family gaming consoles.

I wonder if there will be options or missions/stages to assassinate foreign and domestic democratic loving leaders and policy makers lol......This blows my mind. I posted this here because this could possibly be considered a 'tentacle' of the 4th reich, because you need the 'foot soldiers' to do the dirty work with the financial powers of the 4th directing them and behind them always.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
bri



Joined: 16 Jun 2006
Posts: 3139
Location: Capacious Creek

PostPosted: Sun Mar 28, 2010 2:26 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Our potential foot soldiers who play those games
are a bunch of feminine slobs sir. Laughing

http://undertheradar.military.com/2010/03/army-thinks-video-games-made-recruits-soft/
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Big Boss



Joined: 04 May 2008
Posts: 822
Location: Outer Heaven

PostPosted: Sun Mar 28, 2010 4:29 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Interesting bud lol. Reminds me of an episode in one of the "Metal Gear" games, where "virtual/VR Training" was being criticized by the main character where he stressed something to the effect of "nothing prepares you more than actual physical training" and that "these soldiers will know nothing if they're going to be constantly training using the VR methods".

Now that I think of it, it could be just a major psyop, mobilizing "potentials" mentally.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
skinters



Joined: 07 Sep 2009
Posts: 511

PostPosted: Sun Mar 28, 2010 8:18 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Quote:
The perps weren't charged in the case of JFK, but the quality of the case
has been enough to convince most people. And when you convince a
significant number people about something, it alters their political view
and that alters the course of a whole society.


Sorry to sound sarcastic,but if most people were convinced about what really went on with JFK,i mean to change their perception of future events ie 9/11,it didnt seem to do all that good eh ?.

What if any are the statistics with this ?,has there ever been a question asked of this on the U.S public,in the vain of how many people think going to war in Iraq a good idea.

Also is this what we hope to expect from this,nobody gonna fall but a settle for more people waking up ?.

How many of these 'events' is it going to take before society says enough is enough,and see these things for what they are as soon as it hits ?.

Sorry the way all that sounds,im a bit frustrated....shit i need sleep,and maybe a bit of nookie wouldn't go amiss lol.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
MichaelC



Joined: 06 Jul 2006
Posts: 1984

PostPosted: Mon Mar 29, 2010 3:00 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Quote:
How many of these 'events' is it going to take before society says enough is enough,and see these things for what they are as soon as it hits ?.


Sadly, probably never. Because the NWO Master Criminals, USA division, have things so well organized making sure the taxslavers are supplied with enough drugs, porno, violent entertainment and material 'luxuries'(all on credit of course) to keep them docile. Plus a good healthy dose of FEAR(generated by fantasy scam$/hoaxe$)
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
puffdaddy



Joined: 06 Feb 2006
Posts: 506
Location: Northern California

PostPosted: Mon Mar 29, 2010 9:05 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Really Mike just the USA that has these problems and I am convinced that you live in utopia.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Fintan
Site Admin


Joined: 18 Jan 2006
Posts: 7597

PostPosted: Tue Mar 30, 2010 12:20 pm    Post subject: Audio: 9/11 And The House Of Cards Reply with quote

Quote:

The Beautiful Truth Show - 30th March, 2010

LISTEN:
Broadband Mp3 Audio
http://BreakForNews.com/audio/BeautifulTruth-10-03-30-dsl.mp3
Click to Play or Right-Click to 'Save As' and Download.

Dialup Mp3 Audio
http://BreakForNews.com/audio/BeautifulTruth-10-03-30-dialup.mp3
Click to Play or Right-Click to 'Save As' and Download.

REFERENCES:

Quote:

Source Fed Data


Quote:

Larger Version

Source
Note: Although this article is on ZeroHedge,
you should consider the following comments to the article:

Comment: Tyler, This is undoubtedly the low point of Zero Hedge journalism. I'd have expected Marla to catch you on this. Gary Gorton was THE main advisor to AIG on their CDS activities. He pitched the board on the apparent safety of writing insurance of hundreds of bond/CDO issuances. The fact that his reputation is still intact is a fucking shame. In the old days, he would have been tarred and feathered. It's amazing that he has the balls to write a fucking paper on the messes he recommended. You can redeem yourself by doing some digging into his involvement with AIG. Really disappointed.

Comment: by TimmyM : This is why I threw this subtle dig in my response: "Where is there any mention of the use of CDS as bond insurance for regulatory capital forbearance by European banks?" The omission of this is self-serving revisionism by the author.


Quote:
ON AMAZON
http://www.amazon.com/Partnership-Making-Goldman-Sachs/dp/1594201897



ON AMAZON
http://www.amazon.com/Partnership-Making-Goldman-Sachs/dp/1594201897


Quote:
"Nearly 30 bankers across more than a dozen financial companies have
been named by the government as suspected co-conspirators in a broad
investigation into the municipal derivatives market, according to court
documents." - Yahoo Finance


Quote:
JPMorgan, Lehman, UBS Named
in Bid-Rigging Conspiracy


By William Selway and Martin Z. Braun

March 26 (Bloomberg) -- JPMorgan Chase & Co., Lehman Brothers Holdings Inc. and UBS AG were among more than a dozen Wall Street firms involved in a conspiracy to pay below-market interest rates to U.S. state and local governments on investments, according to documents filed in a U.S. Justice Department criminal antitrust case.

A government list of previously unidentified “co- conspirators” contains more than two dozen bankers at firms also including Bank of America Corp., Bear Stearns Cos., Societe Generale, two of General Electric Co.’s financial businesses and Salomon Smith Barney, the former unit of Citigroup Inc., according to documents filed in U.S. District Court in Manhattan on March 24.

The papers were filed by attorneys for a former employee of CDR Financial Products Inc., an advisory firm indicted in October. The attorneys, as part of their legal filing, identified the roster as being provided by the government. The document is labeled “list of co-conspirators.”

None of the firms or individuals named on the list has been charged with wrongdoing. The court records mark the first time these companies have been identified as co-conspirators. They provide the broadest look yet at alleged collusion in the $2.8 trillion municipal securities market that the government says delivered profits to Wall Street at taxpayers’ expense.

‘Sufficient Evidence’

“If the government is saying they are co-conspirators, the government believes they have sufficient evidence that they can show they were part of the conspiracy,” said Richard Donovan, a partner at New York-based law firm Kelley Drye & Warren LLP and co-chair of its antitrust practice. Donovan isn’t involved in the case.

The government’s case centers on investments known as guaranteed investment contracts that cities, states and school districts buy with the money they receive through municipal bond sales. Some $400 billion of municipal bonds are issued each year, and localities use the contracts to earn a return on some of the money until they need it for construction or other projects.

The Internal Revenue Service sometimes collects earnings on those investments and requires that they be awarded by competitive bidding to ensure that governments receive a fair return. The government charges that CDR ran sham auctions that allowed the banks to pay below-market interest rates to local governments.

CDR Fights Case

CDR, a Los Angeles-based local-government adviser, was indicted in October along with David Rubin, Zevi Wolmark and Evan Zarefsky, three current or former executives. The company and the three men have denied wrongdoing. Since last month, three former CDR employees who weren’t charged in the initial indictment have pleaded guilty and agreed to cooperate with the Justice Department.

More than a dozen financial firms are also facing civil suits filed by municipalities over the alleged conspiracy. Yesterday, U.S. District Judge Victor Marrero in Manhattan refused to toss out a lawsuit brought by Mississippi and other bond issuers.

Brian Marchiony, a spokesman for JPMorgan in New York; Doug Morris, a spokesman for UBS in New York; and Danielle Romero- Apsilos, a spokeswoman for Citigroup in New York, all declined to comment. A Societe Generale spokesman, Jim Galvin; Lehman spokeswoman Kimberly MacLeod, and GE Capital spokesman Ned Reynolds in Stamford, Connecticut, also declined to comment. Bank of America spokeswoman Shirley Norton in San Francisco declined to comment. Bear Stearns was bought by JPMorgan in 2008, the same year Lehman Brothers collapsed.

Laura Sweeney, a Justice Department spokeswoman in Washington, declined to comment.

‘Absolute Disaster’

Banks may choose to cooperate with prosecutors because in light of the government bailout funds they’ve received “ a guilty plea would just be an absolute disaster for some of these companies,” said Nathan Muyskens, a partner at Shook, Hardy & Bacon in Washington and former trial attorney with the Federal Trade Commission’s Bureau of Competition.

“There have been antitrust investigations where there have been companies involved that were just never indicted,” he said in a phone interview.

At the same time, the government will probably focus on seeking to convict individual bankers, he said.

When someone goes to jail for five years, that resonates,” he said. “When a company pays $200 million, it’s simply a balance sheet issue. Jail time is what captures corporate America’s attention.”

Lawyers’ Filing

In a court filing yesterday, defense lawyers said they “inadvertently” included the names of individual and company co-conspirators in a motion asking the court to compel the government to provide more specific evidence of the alleged misconduct. They asked the court to strike the entire exhibit in which the list appears. Judge Marrero granted the request.

The government’s probe became public in 2006 when federal investigators raided CDR and two competitors and issued subpoenas to more than a dozen firms. The “co-conspirators” on the list released in court this week also included Wachovia Corp., which was purchased by San Francisco-based Wells Fargo & Co. in 2008. Elise Wilkinson, a Wells Fargo spokeswoman in Charlotte, North Carolina, didn’t return a call today seeking comment.

October Indictments

The indictments released in October didn’t identify any of the sellers of the investment contracts involved in the alleged conspiracy. They were identified only as Provider A and Provider B. They paid kickbacks to CDR after winning investment deals brokered by the firm, according to the indictments.

The firms did this by paying sham fees tied to financial transactions entered into with other companies, prosecutors said. Kickbacks were paid from 2001 to 2005, ranging from $4,500 to $475,000 each, according to the Justice Department.

According to the list contained in the court filing this week, the investment contracts involved were created by units of GE and divisions of Financial Security Assurance Holdings Ltd., a bond insurer formerly part of Brussels-based lender Dexia SA.

The kickbacks were paid out of fees generated by transactions entered into with two financial institutions that weren’t identified in the October court filing. The March 24 list filed by the defense named the two firms as UBS and Royal Bank of Canada.

Dexia Sale

Dexia completed the sale of FSA’s bond-insurance business in July to Assured Guaranty Ltd. of Hamilton, Bermuda, while retaining its outstanding investment contracts.

Thierry Martiny, a spokesman for Dexia in Brussels, declined to comment. FSA, based in New York, was the biggest insurer of U.S. municipal bonds in 2007 and 2008.

“We have no comment,” said Betsy Castenir, a spokeswoman for Assured Guaranty in New York, in an e-mail response. “Dexia has responsibility for the liabilities of the Financial Products business.”

Royal Bank of Canada “has been fully cooperating with the government,” Kevin Foster, a spokesman for the bank in New York, said in an e-mailed statement. “We have no knowledge or evidence of wrongdoing by any of our employees.”

The case is U.S. v. Rubin/Chambers, Dunhill Insurance Services Inc., 09-CR-01058, U.S. District Court, Southern District of New York (Manhattan).

http://www.businessweek.com/news/2010-03-26/


Quote:
JP Morgan and Citigroup contributed to
Lehman's collapse, says US examiner


JP Morgan Chase and Citigroup helped cause the illiquidity that led to the collapse of Lehman Brothers, the bankrupt bank’s examiner said today in a report filed in Manhattan federal court.

ehman tumbled into its $639 billion bankruptcy, the biggest in US history, because it didn’t have enough liquidity and lost the confidence of its counterparties, according to a 2,200-page report from Anton Valukas, the US Trustee-appointed examiner.

By changing guarantee agreements and making new demands for collateral, JP Morgan and Citigroup helped to precipitate the liquidity crisis that doomed Lehman, Mr Valukas said. “The demands for collateral by Lehman’s lenders had direct impact on Lehman’s liquidity pool,” he said. “Lehman’s available liquidity is central to the question of why Lehman failed.”

Link


Quote:
A Tsunami of Excuses

By WILLIAM D. COHAN - March 11, 2009

IT’S been a year since Bear Stearns collapsed, kicking off Wall Street’s meltdown, and it’s more than time to debunk the myths that many Wall Street executives have perpetrated about what has happened and why.

These tall tales — which tend to take the form of how their firms were the “victims” of a “once-in-a-lifetime tsunami” that nothing could have prevented — not only insult our collective intelligence but also do nothing to restore the confidence in the banking system that these executives’ actions helped to destroy.

Take, for example, the myth that Alan Schwartz, the former chief executive of Bear Stearns, unleashed on the Senate Banking Committee last April after he was asked about what he could have done differently. “I can guarantee you it’s a subject I’ve thought about a lot,” he replied. “Looking backwards and with hindsight, saying, ‘If I’d have known exactly the forces that were coming, what actions could we have taken beforehand to have avoided this situation?’ And I just simply have not been able to come up with anything ... that would have made a difference to the situation that we faced.”

Jimmy Cayne, Mr. Schwartz’s predecessor, never had to testify before Congress. But he told me, with some rare humility, that before he resigned, “there was a period of not seeing the light at the end of the tunnel .... I wasn’t good enough to tell you what was going to happen.”

Yet Dick Fuld, the longtime chief executive of Lehman Brothers, was squarely in the Schwartz camp last October when he told Congress: “I wake up every single night thinking, ‘What could I have done differently?’ What could I have said? What should I have done?’ And I have searched myself every single night. And I come back to this: at the time I made those decisions, I made those decisions with the information I had.”

Harvey Miller, the bankruptcy lawyer who is representing what remains of Lehman, has been working hard to absolve Mr. Fuld. In a brief responding to a motion made by lawyers for the New York State comptroller, who has joined a class-action suit against the company, he wrote, “The comptroller fails to recognize that Lehman was a victim of a financial tsunami that was beyond its control.”

Now, wait just a minute here. Can it possibly be true that veteran Wall Street executives like Messrs. Cayne, Schwartz and Fuld — who were paid an estimated $128 million, $117 million and at least $350 million, respectively, in the five years before their businesses imploded — got all that money but were clueless about the risks they had exposed their firms to in the process?

In fact, although they have not chosen to admit it, many of these top bankers, as well as Stan O’Neal, the former chief executive of Merrill Lynch (who was handed $161.5 million when he “retired” in late 2007) made decision after decision, year after year, that turned their firms into houses of cards.

For instance, even though he had many opportunities to do so, Mr. Cayne never steered Bear Stearns away from an extremely heavy concentration on its hugely profitable fixed-income business. The firm starved its asset management business, its brokerage business and its investment banking business, which were not as profitable as fixed income but would have spread Bear’s risk.

In 2003 Mr. Cayne passed on chances to diversify his firm by buying Pershing, the back office and clearing unit of Credit Suisse First Boston, and Neuberger Berman, a midsize money manager. “Acquisitions were not my forte,” Mr. Cayne told me. As a result, by the end, his top lieutenants stopped even trying to persuade him to diversify.

Mr. Cayne never seriously considered raising the firm’s equity, which we now know was perilously low, nor did he seriously consider selling or merging it. Rather, he deliberately chose to take Bear deeper into the manufacture and sale of all those risky mortgage-backed securities, as well as into the business of doing trades with hedge funds. Why? Simply put, Bear’s board paid him and the other four members of Bear’s executive committee — including Mr. Schwartz and another former chief executive, Alan C. Greenberg — to maximize the firm’s “return on equity” calculation, which is Wall Street lingo for figuring out how much money one can make using as little capital as possible.

This directive encouraged Mr. Cayne to make the firm as profitable as possible — a worthy goal, no doubt — but without raising any more cash or issuing any new stock, as doing either would increase the denominator of the return-on-equity calculation, and thereby lower the bonus pool Mr. Cayne and his executives could split among themselves.

When viewed through this simple prism, it is not the least bit surprising that when Bear Stearns ran into trouble soon after its two hedge funds blew up in June 2007, Mr. Cayne — and later Mr. Schwartz — chose not to raise new equity, even though they could easily have done so back then. So Bear’s balance sheet remained larded with extremely risky assets that the firm had leveraged to the hilt by borrowing cheaply in the overnight financing markets. The lenders of such money have the right to decide each day whether to continue to provide the financing or to cut the borrower off.

At Lehman, the facts and circumstances were somewhat different than those at Bear Stearns — for instance, after Mr. Cayne passed on it, Lehman bought Neuberger Berman, and Lehman had built a bigger investment-banking business over the years than Bear. Yet the outcome was similar.

Like Mr. Cayne, Mr. Fuld had made huge and risky bets on the manufacture and sale of mortgage-backed securities — by underwriting tens of billions of mortgage securities in 2006 alone — and on the acquisition of highly leveraged commercial real estate. Five days before the firm imploded, Mr. Fuld proposed spinning off some $30 billion of these toxic assets still on the firm’s balance sheet into a separate company. But the market hated the idea, and the death spiral began.

Even Goldman Sachs, which appears to have fared better in this crisis than any other large Wall Street firm, was no saint. The firm underwrote some $100 billion of commercial mortgage obligations — putting it among the top 10 underwriters — before it got out of the game in 2006 and then cleaned up by selling these securities short. Basically, Goldman got lucky. (Really??!! - FD)

When in the summer of 2007 questions began to be raised about the value of such mortgage-related assets, the overnight lenders began getting increasingly nervous. Eventually, they decided the risks of lending to these firms far outweighed the rewards, and they pulled the plug.

The firms then simply ran out of cash, as everyone lost confidence in them at once and wanted their money back at the same time. Bear Stearns, Lehman and Merrill Lynch all made the classic mistake of borrowing short and lending long and, as one Bear executive told me, that was “game, set, match.”

Could these Wall Street executives have made other, less risky choices? Of course they could have, if they had been motivated by something other than absolute greed. Many smaller firms — including Evercore Partners, Greenhill and Lazard — took one look at those risky securities and decided to steer clear. When I worked at Lazard in the 1990s, people tried to convince the firm’s patriarchs — André Meyer, Michel David-Weill and Felix Rohatyn — that they must expand into riskier lines of business to keep pace with the big boys. The answer was always a firm no.

Even the venerable if obscure Brown Brothers Harriman — the private partnership where Prescott Bush, the father and grandfather of two presidents, made his fortune — has remained consistently profitable since 1818. None of these smaller firms manufactured a single mortgage-backed security — and none has taken a penny of taxpayer money during this crisis.

So enough already with the charade of Wall Street executives pretending not to know what really happened and why. They know precisely why their banks either crashed or are alive only thanks to taxpayer-provided life support. And at least one of them — John Mack, the chief executive of Morgan Stanley — seems willing to admit it. He appears to have undergone a religious conversion of sorts after his firm’s near-death experience.

“The events of the past months have shaken the foundation of our global financial system,” Mr. Mack told Congress in February. “And they’ve made clear the need for profound change to that system. At Morgan Stanley, we’ve dramatically brought down our leverage, increased transparency, reduced our level of risk and made changes to how we pay people.” He continued: “We didn’t do everything right. Far from it. And make no mistake: as the head of this firm, I take responsibility for our performance.”

Well, it’s a start. But there can be no restoration of confidence in the banking system — and therefore no hope for an economic recovery — until Wall Street comes clean. If the executives responsible for what happened won’t step forward on their own, perhaps a subpoena-wielding panel along the lines of the 9/11 commission can be created to administer a little truth serum.

http://www.nytimes.com/2009/03/12/opinion/12cohan.html?_r=3

_________________
Minds are like parachutes.
They only function when open.


Last edited by Fintan on Wed Mar 31, 2010 6:20 pm; edited 2 times in total
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail Visit poster's website
bri



Joined: 16 Jun 2006
Posts: 3139
Location: Capacious Creek

PostPosted: Tue Mar 30, 2010 1:06 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Wow another audio?
I'm going to throw this on my MP3 player
and listen at work tonight.
Thanks.
Looking forwards to reading
forum member posts when I get back.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Display posts from previous:   
Post new topic   Reply to topic    The Next Level Forum Index -> General Discussion All times are GMT - 5 Hours
Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3 ... 16, 17, 18 ... 35, 36, 37  Next
Page 17 of 37

 
Jump to:  
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum


Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2005 phpBB Group

Theme xand created by spleen.