Banks Engaged in Money Laundering–Fund Drug Cartels

Banks Engaged in  Money Laundering– Fund Drug Cartels

I suggest you read this entire article by Anthony Gucciardi.  Do you seeing any upper executives or board of directors of these mega banks going to jail for money laundering?  No.  At best they get a tiny fine which they pass on to their deposit holders and customers in higher fees and costs for their services.  By not sending them to jail and allowing them to treat getting caught as the cost of doing business governments are rubber stamping this conduct.

As Gucciardi queries:

So what is to be done to these banks at the end of the day? Are executives being  jailed, companies being dissolved, and funds being withdrawn from Mexican drug  cartels and terror groups? Well, no. Instead, taxpayers are helping to  fund the megabanks with $83 billion per year – far more than any minor  settlements paid out by the banks.

So if government won’t do anything about it, does it mean that you should be ratifying objectionable conduct in which you get the penalties (when they’re caught) in higher fees but you don’t share in the illegal gains?

Ask yourself from a moral aspect or social responsibility should you be trusting them to protect and hold your hard earned money?  Think about it!–No Name Attorney

NBC Report Confirms Bankers Really Do Fund Drug Cartels, Terror Groups

by Anthony Gucciardi

Still think it’s a ‘conspiracy theory’ that the largest mega  banks are profiting off of the drug trade, or even the activity of terror  groups? A little-known NBC report from 2012 actually confirms  it. In fact, one 2012 NBC report details how HSBC bank helped to  finance everything from Mexican drug cartels to Syrian terror cells.  Thanks to a United States Senate report, which centers around the role of Mexican drug  cartel funds travelling through HSBC, NBC and a few other outlets actually  covered the breaking news — albeit to a small degree.

banks drug cartels
Photo Credit: StoryLeak.com

And  it’s this report that reveals how the United States branch of HSBC  directly aided backers of Al-Qaeda and Mexican drug cartels through  both finances and overall banking services. From terror-linked groups out of  Saudi Arabia and Bangladesh, HSBC was tied up with numerous terror groups  and financially empowering them for quite some time. For around a decade or more, in fact. Yet HSBC has managed to get away without much of a hitch. Even the 2012  Senate Report we’re discussing was simply a ‘probe’ that documents the events  themselves. Even the major United States bank regulatory group the Office  of the Comptroller of the Currency was deemed to have improperly looked into the  situation — instead turning a blind eye to the entire operation. The  investigative group at the Senate even reports on how the very culture of HSBC  has been ‘polluted’ during the lengthy time period of terror and drug  funding.

Read more:

 

Wall Street Bailout: Were We Lied To, Robbed And Misled?

The Iconic Bull Symbol of Wall Street

 Wall Street Bailout:  Were We Lied To, Robbed And Misled?

I appreciate this interview by Chris Martenson of Peak Prosperity doing this interview of David Stockman.  Stockman is someone who understands our economy and how government functions.  Listen to his analysis of the Wall Street Bailout.

There’s a saying when someone wrongs you:  Shame on them the first time they do the wrongdoing.  The second time they commit the wrongdoing, shame on you (or me).

Do you think that this is applicable?  And what do you think should be done?   Share your thoughts and possible solutions.

Think about it!  –No Name Attorney

David Stockman: We’ve Been Lied To, Robbed, And Misled

From PeakProsperity.Com

And we’re still at risk of it happening all over again

by Adam Taggart

Saturday, March 30, 2013, 12:42 PM

, , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

Then, when the Fed’s fire hoses started spraying an elephant soup of liquidity injections in every direction and its balance sheet grew by $1.3 trillion in just thirteen weeks compared to $850 billion during its first ninety-four years, I became convinced that the Fed was flying by the seat of its pants, making it up as it went along. It was evident that its aim was to stop the hissy fit on Wall Street and that the thread of a Great Depression 2.0 was just a cover story for a panicked spree of money printing that exceeded any other episode in recorded human history.

David Stockman, The Great Deformation

David Stockman, former director of the OMB under President Reagan, former US Representative, and veteran financier is an insider’s insider. Few people understand the ways in which both Washington DC and Wall Street work and intersect better than he does.

In his upcoming book, The Great Deformation: The Corruption of Capitalism in America, Stockman lays out how we have devolved from a free market economy into a managed one that operates for the benefit of a privileged few. And when trouble arises, these few are bailed out at the expense of the public good.

By manipulating the price of money through sustained and historically low interest rates, Greenspan and Bernanke created an era of asset mis-pricing that inevitably would need to correct.  And when market forces attempted to do so in 2008, Paulson et al hoodwinked the world into believing the repercussions would be so calamitous for all that the institutions responsible for the bad actions that instigated the problem needed to be rescued — in full — at all costs.

Of course, history shows that our markets and economy would have been better off had the system been allowed to correct. Most of the “too big to fail” institutions would have survived or been broken into smaller, more resilient, entities. For those that would have failed, smaller, more responsible banks would have stepped up to replace them – as happens as part of the natural course of a free market system:

Essentially there was a cleansing run on the wholesale funding market in the canyons of Wall Street going on. It would have worked its will, just like JP Morgan allowed it to happen in 1907 when we did not have the Fed getting in the way. Because they stopped it in its tracks after the AIG bailout and then all the alphabet soup of different lines that the Fed threw out, and then the enactment of TARP, the last two investment banks standing were rescued, Goldman and Morgan [Stanley], and they should not have been. As a result of being rescued and having the cleansing liquidation of rotten balance sheets stopped, within a few weeks and certainly months they were back to the same old games, such that Goldman Sachs got $10 billion dollars for the fiscal year that started three months later after that check went out, which was October 2008. For the fiscal 2009 year, Goldman Sachs generated what I call a $29 billion surplus – $13 billion of net income after tax, and on top of that $16 billion of salaries and bonuses, 95% of it which was bonuses.

Therefore, the idea that they were on death’s door does not stack up. Even if they had been, it would not make any difference to the health of the financial system. These firms are supposed to come and go, and if people make really bad bets, if they have a trillion dollar balance sheet with six, seven, eight hundred billion dollars worth of hot-money short-term funding, then they ought to take their just reward, because it would create lessons, it would create discipline. So all the new firms that would have been formed out of the remnants of Goldman Sachs where everybody lost their stock values – which for most of these partners is tens of millions, hundreds of millions – when they formed a new firm, I doubt whether they would have gone back to the old game. What happened was the Fed stopped everything in its tracks, kept Goldman Sachs intact, the reckless Goldman Sachs and the reckless Morgan Stanley, everyone quickly recovered their stock value and the game continues. This is one of the evils that comes from this kind of deep intervention in the capital and money markets.

Stockman’s anger at the unnecessary and unfair capital transfer from taxpayer to TBTF bank is matched only by his concern that, even with those bailouts, the banking system is still unacceptably vulnerable to a repeat of the same crime:

The banks quickly worked out their solvency issues because the Fed basically took it out of the hides of Main Street savers and depositors throughout America. When the Fed panicked, it basically destroyed the free-market interest rate – you cannot have capitalism, you cannot have healthy financial markets without an interest rate, which is the price of money, the price of capital that can freely measure and reflect risk and true economic prospects.

Well, once you basically unplug the pricing mechanism of a capital market and make it entirely an administered rate by the Fed, you are going to cause all kinds of deformations as I call them, or mal-investments as some of the Austrians used to call them, that basically pollutes and corrupts the system. Look at the deposit rate right now, it is 50 basis points, maybe 40, for six months. As a result of that, probably $400-500 billion a year is being transferred as a fiscal maneuver by the Fed from savers to the banks. They are collecting the spread, they’ve then booked the profits, they’ve rebuilt their book net worth, and they paid back the TARP basically out of what was thieved from the savers of America.

Now they go down and pound the table and whine and pout like JP Morgan and the rest of them, you have to let us do stock buy backs, you have to let us pay out dividends so we can ramp our stock and collect our stock option winnings. It is outrageous that the authorities, after the so-called “near death experience” of 2008 and this massive fiscal safety net and monetary safety net was put out there, is allowing them to pay dividends and to go into the market and buy back their stock. They should be under house arrest in a sense that every dime they are making from this artificial yield group being delivered by the Fed out of the hides of savers should be put on their balance sheet to build up retained earnings, to build up a cushion. I do not care whether it is fifteen or twenty or twenty-five percent common equity and retained earnings-to-assets or not, that is what we should be doing if we are going to protect the system from another raid by these people the next time we get a meltdown, which can happen at any time.

You can see why I talk about corruption, why crony capitalism is so bad. I mean, the Basel capital standards, they are a joke. We are just allowing the banks to go back into the same old game they were playing before. Everybody said the banks in late 2007 were the greatest thing since sliced bread. The market cap of the ten largest banks in America, including from Bear Stearns all the way to Citibank and JP Morgan and Goldman and so forth, was $1.25 trillion. That was up thirty times from where the predecessors of those institutions had been. Only in 1987, when Greenspan took over and began the era of bubble finance – slowly at first then rapidly, eventually, to have the market cap grow thirty times – and then on the eve of the great meltdown see the $1.25 trillion to market cap disappear, vanish, vaporize in panic in September 2008. Only a few months later, $1 trillion of that market cap disappeared in to the abyss and panic, and Bear Stearns is going down, and all the rest.

This tells you the system is dramatically unstable. In a healthy financial system and a free capital market, if I can put it that way, you are not going to have stuff going from nowhere to @1.2 trillion and then back to a trillion practically at the drop of a hat. That is instability; that is a case of a medicated market that is essentially very dangerous and is one of the many adverse consequences and deformations that result from the central-bank dominated, corrupt monetary system that has slowly built up ever since Nixon closed the gold window, but really as I say in my book, going back to 1933 in April when Roosevelt took all the private gold. So we are in a big dead-end trap, and they are digging deeper every time you get a new maneuver.

Click the play button below to listen to Chris’ interview with David Stockman (56m:33s):

Also link to David Stockman Interview.

Transcript

Chris Martenson: Welcome to another Peak Prosperity Podcast. I am your host, of course, Chris Martenson. Today we are speaking with a guest that I am especially keen to have on to interview today, Mr. David Stockman, economic policy maker, politician, and financier.

Read More Here…

Bankster Fraud is Influencing Food Fraud

How Bankster Fraud is Influencing Food Fraud

If you think that Europe’s Horsemeat Scandal Can’t Come Here, Think Again!

From my research the EU food code laws are stronger than the US.  After all, the GMOs have to be labeled and they limit how much genetically modified can be in a product.  Personally I trust cheeses and other dairy products more in grocery stores than I do those processed in the US.  In Europe their dairy cows are not shot up with the rbgh or rbst hormones.  So when I go to the traditional grocery stores, I purchase the pricer cheeses than those from the US unless the US product is marked rbst or rbgh hormone free.

So this scandal about Europeans thinking they are buying cow meat but getting horse and donkey meat substituted was a shocker to me because they have more safety features.  (Could those safety features discovered this earlier than it would be discovered in the US?)

Food processors are cutting costs as much as possible to reduce inflation which is hitting them hard.  But in that process are they negligent when cutting costs or at worse compromising their business ethics?

This article shows how what happened with Wall Street, the bankster fraud, the Libor scandals, etc., from the financial sector infiltrates other areas.  Since money runs the economy then it makes sense that their fraud and its tentacles will filter over time into everything else.

This is why we must stop bailing out their wrongful conduct.  These fraudsters must go to jail for a long time before our economic system can truly heal from the damage they’ve inflicted.

It’s one thing to steal someone’s money; it’s another thing to make people sick.  When these ethically challenged people are substituting products, committing food fraud, those of us who have food allergies, sensitivities, etc. are extremely vulnerable.  Don’t they realize someone could get sick or at worse die from product substitution without disclosure? 

We all need to follow closely and be hyper vigilant about “product substitutions” whether disclosed or undisclosed.  Buy whole or single item foods and avoid those processed foods with multiple items.  Besides saving money the spend for “convenience” we will safeguarding our health when we control what goes into our food dishes. –No Name Attorney

Horsemeat Economics

From Azizonomics

February 20, 2013

 

horse-meat-420x210

The British (and now Europe-wide) scandal of corporations selling horse meat as beef is emblematic of many of the problems with big, unwieldy systems.

The similarity between horse meat and subprime has already been noted in a Financial Times editorial:

The food industry has long known that processed meat is susceptible to fraud. While it is relatively easy to verify whole cuts of meat taken from a carcass, this is not the case for the bits left behind. These are gathered up and shipped out to thousands of outlets for processing into lower-value products. In Britain, monitoring this industry is left to local authorities and the retailers themselves.

Yet this surveillance has become virtually impossible in the modern world of food production. Consumers want ever lower prices. But food margins are already wafer thin. The drive to cut costs has sent retailers scouting for cheaper suppliers in far-flung parts of the world. Supply chains have become vast and unwieldy. And internet tenders drive prices down even further.

This has brought big benefits to consumers who until recently enjoyed consistently falling prices. But in a disturbing parallel to the financial sector’s subprime crisis, the growing distance between supermarkets and their suppliers has also opened the door to fraud on a scale that as yet can only be guessed at. The meat used in these products now travels across multiple borders and through myriad companies. Regulators do not have the resources to keep up. Only those who buy the processed products and sell them under their own brands can apply the pressure that will limit chances for fraud.

Read More Here…