The Point of Bank Regulations Is to Protect Bankers from Their Prey, Not Vice Versa!

Wall Street fraud caused the Great Depression and the current financial crisisTop economists and financial experts agree that our economy will never recover unless Wall Street fraud is prosecuted.

Yet the government has more or less made it official policy not to prosecute fraud, and instead to do everything necessary to cover up for Wall Street.  For example, the Obama administration is prosecuting fewer financial crimes than under Reagan or either Bush.

For example, we pointed out in 2010:

The government’s entire strategy now – as during the S&L crisis – is to cover up how bad things are.

But it is not only a matter of covering up fraud that has already happened. The government also created an environment which greatly encouraged fraud.

Here are just a few of many potential examples:

  • Tim Geithner was complicit in Lehman’s accounting fraud, (and see this), and pushed to pay AIG’s CDS counterparties at full value, and then to keep the deal secret. And as Robert Reich notes, Geithner was “very much in the center of the action” regarding the secret bail out of Bear Stearns without Congressional approval. William Black points out: “Mr. Geithner, as President of the Federal Reserve Bank of New York since October 2003, was one of those senior regulators who failed to take any effective regulatory action to prevent the crisis, but instead covered up its depth”
  • The former chief accountant for the SEC says that Bernanke and Paulson broke the law and should be prosecuted
  • The government knew about mortgage fraud a long time ago. For example, the FBI warned of an “epidemic” of mortgage fraud in 2004. However, the FBI, DOJ and other government agencies then stood down and did nothing. See this and this. For example, the Federal Reserve turned its cheek and allowed massive fraud, and the SEC has repeatedly ignored accounting fraud. Indeed, Alan Greenspan took the position that fraud could never happen
  • Paulson and Bernanke falsely stated that the big banks receiving Tarp money were healthy, when they were not

Economist James K. Galbraith wrote in the introduction to his father, John Kenneth Galbraith’s, definitive study of the Great Depression, The Great Crash, 1929:

The main relevance of The Great Crash, 1929 to the great crisis of 2008 is surely here. In both cases, the government knew what it should do. Both times, it declined to do it. In the summer of 1929 a few stern words from on high, a rise in the discount rate, a tough investigation into the pyramid schemes of the day, and the house of cards on Wall Street would have tumbled before its fall destroyed the whole economy. In 2004, the FBI warned publicly of “an epidemic of mortgage fraud.” But the government did nothing, and less than nothing, delivering instead low interest rates, deregulation and clear signals that laws would not be enforced. The signals were not subtle: on one occasion the director of the Office of Thrift Supervision came to a conference with copies of the Federal Register and a chainsaw. There followed every manner of scheme to fleece the unsuspecting ….

This was fraud, perpetrated in the first instance by the government on the population, and by the rich on the poor.

***

The government that permits this to happen is complicit in a vast crime.

In other words, the fraud started at the very top with Greenspan, Bush, Paulson, Negroponte, Bernanke, Geithner, Rubin, Summers and all of the rest of the boys.

As William Black told me today:

In criminology jargon: they created an intensely criminogenic environment.

The government’s special inspector general in charge of oversight of the Troubled Asset Relief Program (the “TARP” bank bailouts) – Neil M. Barofsky – said today:

It was a “message to the banks ‘if we commit fraud, we break the rules, don’t worry, we’re too big — they’ll never bring the appropriate steps against us,’” Barofsky says in an interview with The Daily Ticker. “And that is why we’ve had scandal after scandal after scandal.”

This was a “global conspiracy to fix one of the most important interest rates in the world,” Barofsky continues. “[Geithner] heard this information and looked the other way. Geithner and other regulators should be held accountable, they should be fired across the board. If they knew about an ongoing fraud, and they didn’t do anything about it, they don’t deserve to have their jobs. I hope we see people in handcuffs.

Government regulators have become so corrupted and “captured” by those they regulate that Americans know that the cop is on the take.  (Even top justice officials are incredibly cozy with Wall Street fraudsters.)

Institutional corruption is killing people’s trust in our government and our institutions, which is one of the reasons the economy is faltering again.

Indeed, polls show that very few Americans believe that the U.S. government has the “consent of the governed”, a higher percentage of Americans liked King George during the Revolutionary War than like Congress today, and people are publicly discussing whether it’s a good or bad idea to “hang bankers”.

I noted 7 years ago:

I am NOT calling for the overthrow of the government. In fact, I am calling for the reinstatement of our government. I am calling for an end to lawless dictatorship and a return to the rule of law. Rather than trying to subvert the constitution, I am calling for its enforcement.

***

The best way to avoid all types of revolution would be for the government to start following the rule of law. I passionately hope it will do so.

While conservatives tend to view government as the problem and liberals tend to view corporations as the problem, the real problem is the malignant, symbiotic relationship between corrupt officials and criminal corporate leaders.  Without the cancerous relationship, neither side could cause so much damage.  If America returns to the rule of law, we might have a fighting chance.

The justice system may be the only thing which stands between peace and violence.   All of those who benefited from Wall Street fraud must be prosecuted … including corrupt government officials who aided and abetted their crimes, helped cover them up, or have blocked prosecution.

Iceland should be a role model:

Iceland has prosecuted the fraudster bank heads (and here) and their former prime minister, and their economy is recovering nicely… because trust is being restored in the financial system.

Indeed, even evangelical leader Pat Robertson agrees:

Pat Robertson discussed the banking crisis and glowingly spoke about how Iceland jailed many of the bankers who devastated their nation’s economy by taking out fraudulent loans. Robertson hailed the Nordic nation for its actions and said that Americans should deal with the financial crisis in the same way.

***

“They are putting people in jail.  Prime ministers are being indicted. They are going after banks. The people said the banks are ripping us off. We don’t like what they did, and they brought our country to ruin. Suddenly, Iceland is turning around and they look like a big success story!”

***

“We could start putting all of those bankers in jail. There was not one banker prosecuted and so many people were lying, and so-called “no-doc loans” and liars’ loans, and none of them have been held accountable.

***

Iceland is leading the way and their GDP is growing, and all of a sudden, they were in a terrible mess, terrible mess, and look what is happening!”

From Zero Hedge, here.

על הציונות והשואה

כישלון הציונות

בניגוד למה שסיפרו לנו: הציונות נכשלה. מטרת הציונות, מראשית הקמת התנועה, הייתה מענה ל”שאלת היהודים” – סכנה קיומית שריחפה על יהודים בגולה. האסון התממש – איחרנו את הרכבת.

2444

התנועה הציונית הוקמה על ידי בנימין זאב הרצל שהתמסר לרעיון כבר מסוף המאה ה-19. מטרת הציונות, מראשית הקמת התנועה, הייתה מענה ל”שאלת היהודים” – סכנה קיומית שריחפה על יהודים בגולה. האסון התממש – הציונות נכשלה – איחרנו את הרכבת.

הרצל, בן למשפחה חילונית, חווה אירועים אנטישמיים מגיל צעיר בבודפשט, הונגריה בה גדל. הוא למד בבית הספר יסודי יהודי והמשיך את לימודי התיכון בגימנסיה הריאלית הציבורית, אותה נאלץ לעזוב עקב אווירה אנטי יהודית עוינת. את לימודי המשפטים סיים באוניברסיטת וינה בה השלים דוקטורט במשפטים. גם את אגודת הסטודנטים נאלץ לעזוב בגלל איבה ליהודים. את מקצוע עריכת הדין נטש לדבריו בעיקר בגלל מגבלות קידום מקצועי על רקע אנטישמי.

אנקדוטה סמלית ומעניינת אודות הרצל, שנעלמה מאתנו, אינה מוזכרת (ואינה שייכת לנושא הכתבה…): בנימין זאב הרצל היה בן למשפחה ספרדית מצד אביו, ואשכנזי מצד אמו… סבו של הרצל היה גבאי בית כנסת של קהילה ספרדית בסרביה בה כיהן הרב יהודה שלמה אלקלעי. רב יוצא דופן שהיה ציוני עוד לפני שהומצא המונח “ציונות” וגם עלה בעצמו לארץ ישראל. מנפלאות ההיסטוריה היהודית… הרצל בישר בדמותו גם את מיזוג עדות ישראל.

יש לשער שהגותו של הרב הדומיננטי אלקלעי (שמוכר היום כאחד ממבשרי הציונות הראשונים) השפיעה על הלך הרוחות במשפחה מצד האב, ותרמה גם היא להתפתחות המחשבה הציונית אצל הרצל.

את הרצל הטרידה בראש ובראשונה “שאלת היהודים”. הסיכון הקיומי שמרחף על יהודים. בשנת 1895 הוא ציין ביומנו בפריז כי אף חלפה בראשו המחשבה שהתנצרות המונית עשויה להיות הפתרון ל”בעיה היהודית”. הקונגרס הציוני הראשון שהרצל יזם בבזל שבשוויץ (1897) קרא להקמת בית ליהודים בארץ ישראל. למרות זאת, בערה בהרצל ההכרה שיש להוציא את היהודים מאירופה ופחות חשוב לאן: אוגנדה, קפריסין, צפון סיני, או ארץ ישראל. פעילותו הציונית האינטנסיבית נמשכה פחות מעשר שנים – הרצל נפטר בגיל 44.

המשך לקרוא…

מאתר קו ישר, כאן.

איסור שמיעת מוזיקה בספירת העומר הוא המצאה גמורה

הדור הצעיר מדבר – מענדל ראטה | פרק ג – האם מותר לשמוע מוזיקה בספירת העומר? | Mendl Roth

Published on May 1, 2018
המשפיע החסידי ר’ מענדל ראטה בסרטון חדש בסדרת הסרטונים הפופולרית שלו והפעם על נושא המוזיקה בספירת העומר, מה דעת הפוסקים והאם האיסור חד משמעי?
מאתר יוטיוב, כאן.

Why Rejoice on Lag Ba’omer?

Why do we celebrate, after the 24,000 Talmidim stopped dying?

Why do we celebrate, after the 24,000 Talmidim stopped dying?

The Pri Chodosh ( O Ch. 493 ) asked this question and answered that the Simcha is, for the five new talmidim (after the death of the 24,000) who didn’t die.  (קצת דוחק -אמבצי)

Perhaps we can say, in Shas Bavli & Yerushalmi there is no mention of Lag Baomer. The first ones to mention  L.B. are some Rishonim in the name of the Gaonim. The Rishonim, Tur, and Mechaber who do mention Lag Baomer don’t mention or consider L. B.  as a day of Simcha. All they say is that there is no Aveilus on L. B., (weddings, haircuts etc. permitted) because they stopped dying.  There is no mention of a Yom Tov on L. B.

It is only the Rema in the name of the Maharil who writes that on L. B. we are “מרבים בו קצת שמחה*.” (increase a little Simcha)

The Rema does not give any reason why the Simcha. It definitely is not because they stopped dying, but for other reasons.

The Chasam Sofer (Y.D. 233) gives two reasons why we increase with Simcha on L. B.

1)      הוד שבהוד  (Kabalistic)

2)      According to the Midrash, the מן (Manna) came down the first time on L. B.

The Chasam Sofer continues and says that To establish Lag Baomer. as a Yom of Simcha and make a fire at this specific place (Meron) and have the masses come there, He is not sure if this may be done. No נס happened on that day and no mention of it in the Gemoro or Poskim as Yom Tov. The extent of Simcha is only, no fasting and no hesped.

Because they stopped dying we stop our Aveilus but this is not the reason why we rejoice. We rejoice because of הוד שבהוד or because of the מן etc.

* seems less Simcha than Mishnichnas Adar Marbin B’Simcha (no Ketzas).

From Toras Aba, here.

Ron Paul on British Death Panels

Baby Alfie, the Latest Victim of Omnipotent Government

Twenty-three-month-old Alfie Evans passed away in a British hospital on Saturday. While the official cause of death was a degenerative brain disease, Alfie may have been murdered by the British health system and the British high court. Doctors at the hospital treating Alfie decided to remove his life support, against the wishes of Alfie’s parents. The high court not only upheld the doctors’ authority to override the parents’ wishes, it refused to allow the parents to take Alfie abroad for treatment.

In upholding the government’s authority to substitute its judgment for that of Alfie’s parents, the high court is following in the footsteps of authoritarians throughout history. Ever since Plato, supporters of big government have sought to put government in charge of raising children. The authoritarianism of a system where “experts” can override parents is underscored by a police warning that they were “monitoring” social media posts regarding Alfie.

Alfie’s case is not just an example of the dangers of allowing government to usurp parental authority or the failures of socialized medicine. It shows the logical result of the widespread acceptance of the idea that rights are mere privileges bestowed by government. It follows from this idea that rights can be taken away whenever demanded by government officials or the popular will.

Of course, most western politicians deny they believe rights come from government. They instead claim that government must place “reasonable” limits on rights to advance important policy goals, such as limiting the right to free speech to protect certain groups from hate speech or limiting property rights to promote economic equality. But, a right by its very nature cannot be limited or abolished and still be a right.

This disdain for a true understanding of rights is found among both liberals and conservatives. Both support a welfare-warfare state funded via the theft of income taxes and the indirect theft of inflation. Both support jailing people for nonviolent actions like drinking raw milk. Many politicians, regardless of ideology, support restrictions on parental rights such as mandatory vaccination laws.

While claiming to support the right to life, most modern liberals not only support legalized abortion, they want to force pro-lifers to fund abortion providers. Both the right-wing neocons and left-wing humanitarian interventionists dismiss the innocents killed in US military actions as inconsequential “collateral damage.”

America’s Founding Fathers rejected the idea that rights come from government. They instead embraced the view that rights are either granted by the creator or are a basic attribute of humanity.

Since rights do not come from government, government has no more legitimate authority to violate our rights than does a private individual. Thus, if an individual cannot use force to make you help others, neither can the government. If an individual cannot use force to stop you from gambling online or telling un-PC jokes, neither can the government. If an individual cannot use force to stop parents from seeking medical treatment for their child, neither can the government.

Widespread acceptance of natural rights and the principle of nonaggression that flows from natural rights is key to obtaining and maintaining a free society. Thus, educating people in the benefits of free markets, individual liberty, and a foreign policy of peace and free trade is key to protecting future Alfie Evanses, and other victims of the welfare-warfare state, as well as to restoring respect for the moral principles of liberty among a critical mass of the people.

From Lewrockwell.com, here.