It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Why Is Senate Asking Soros' Opinion????

page: 2
2
<< 1   >>

log in

join
share:
JSR

posted on Jun, 4 2008 @ 11:16 AM
link   

Originally posted by Icarus Rising
Maybe he is tired of seeing the global corporate fascist elite bite the hand that feeds them. Those slime are going to greed themselves right out of business before too long if they keep this up. Which, come to think of it, is just fine with me, as well.


he might not be a lefty, but IMO he is still in league with the global elite.



....Currently, he is the chairman of Soros Fund Management and the Open Society Institute and is also a former member of the Board of Directors of the Council on Foreign Relations......




posted on Jun, 4 2008 @ 11:23 AM
link   
Get a clue, Jericho...

You know which post I'm referring to...

Quit pretending to be smart....

Peace

[edit on 4-6-2008 by Rilence]

Mod note: Okay, that's more than enough. Warning issued. No more stalking, personal attacks, derision or other abusive behavior. -Majic

[edit on 6/4/2008 by Majic]



posted on Jun, 4 2008 @ 11:31 AM
link   
reply to post by JSR
 


Oh, he is rich and elite, no doubt about it. I don't think he is a fascist, though. It is possible to get rich taking positions and engaging in business practices that benefit the little guy, too. It doesn't make you very popular with the rest of the crowd, though. Maybe that is why he is getting raked over the coals by Murdoch and Co.

Edit to add that in case anybody is interested, the thread on the Senate hearings that prompted the question posed by this thread can be found here.

[edit on 4-6-2008 by Icarus Rising]



posted on Jun, 4 2008 @ 01:05 PM
link   

Originally posted by Rilence
Get a clue, Jericho...

You know which post I'm referring to...

Quit pretending to be smart....


Whatever, Gus. I was just making a statement that I didn't see which thread you were referring to.

Clues are now on sale at the 7-11 if you need one. Get the sixpack, that's cheaper than buying them individually.



posted on Jun, 4 2008 @ 04:07 PM
link   
I realize there has been some unfortunate provocation in this thread and am dealing with it, so let's please try not to get derailed and stick to the topic.

Thanks.



posted on Jun, 4 2008 @ 07:10 PM
link   

Originally posted by Icarus Rising

Oh, and edit to mention, there were four other members of the panel testifying before the Senate Commerce committee, and they all agreed that the problem wasn't driven by supply and demand, but by unregulated predatory speculation.



Panel 1

Mr. Gerry Ramm
President, Inland Oil Company
on behalf of the Petroleum Marketers Association of America

Mr. George Soros
Chairman
Soros Fund Management

Mr. Michael Greenberger
Professor
University of Maryland School of Law

Mr. Mark N. Cooper
Director of Research
Consumer Federation of America

Ms. Lee Ann Watson
Deputy Director, Division of Investigation
Office of Enforcement, Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

source




Well this is sort of my point. Who picks the people that are going to testify, and do they already know what the testimony is going to be before the hearings begin?

And more importantly, is there any conflict of interest at work? If the people who are testifying, like Soros, benefit from the subsequent policy that's created, why take their word for anything?



posted on Jun, 4 2008 @ 07:20 PM
link   
I guess at that point you have to look around you with the awareness God gave you and gauge for yourself the truth. If you want to doubt what they are saying just because of who they are, and question why they were called to testify to begin with, then discernment about what they are saying isn't going to get a chance to come into play.

I would think the Senate Commerce Committee decided who would testify and agreed amongst themselves. It is a bi-partisan committee.



posted on Jun, 5 2008 @ 11:54 AM
link   
Hey, that same group asked the oil company execs what was going on just a couple weeks ago. Why can't they get an alternative point of view? If anything, those oil execs would have a MUCH more biased point of view than Soros.

But that's okay because they come from the right wing conservative faction, huh?



posted on Jun, 5 2008 @ 11:59 AM
link   

Originally posted by ClintK
Hey, that same group asked the oil company execs what was going on just a couple weeks ago. Why can't they get an alternative point of view? If anything, those oil execs would have a MUCH more biased point of view than Soros.

But that's okay because they come from the right wing conservative faction, huh?


No, you have it completely backwards.

The oil execs were called in to testify because the Congress already had accused them of not doing enough to stop the rise in oil prices. They were not seeking the oil execs opinion for the purpose of forming policy. They were dragging them into the arena so they could be seen attacking the evil oil execs who are making the price of gas go up so much.

And even so, it made FAR MORE sense to have oil execs than George Soros testify because the oil execs are in the oil business. Soros claimed he never trades oil, so what the heck was his alleged area of expertise on the subject?

[edit on 5-6-2008 by jamie83]



posted on Jun, 5 2008 @ 12:27 PM
link   
reply to post by jamie83
 



Originally posted by jamie83
And even so, it made FAR MORE sense to have oil execs than George Soros testify because the oil execs are in the oil business. Soros claimed he never trades oil, so what the heck was his alleged area of expertise on the subject?

[edit on 5-6-2008 by jamie83]


Bubbles. Soros has been avidly studying them for many years. The input from him was whether the current rise in oil prices are the result of a bubble, supply and demand, speculation, or what?

Why ask Soros? Well, if I were on a committee, I would want input from all parties involved. Otherwise you're just working on a pre-determined conclusion and are only looking for validation of your foregone conclusion.

Let everyone speak their piece. Then determine who's lying and who's not.



posted on Jun, 5 2008 @ 12:53 PM
link   
okay folks.. now I'm not an oil expert.. but if oil prices now seem to be going down but in order to have prices rise so high means someone was buying up a hell of a load of oil and all the money was going into someones pocket. Let us guess into whose pockets this money flowed into?? I would say the major banks??? so this means:

1. someone bought a heck of lots of oil supply
2. probably kept it for while & sold it when it was at max price
3. this explains the reason why prices are now dwindeling.

so yes could very well be that ungle george is the master of this game & most probably is now also in the oil busines...

ciaoo belli






posted on Jun, 6 2008 @ 09:06 AM
link   

Originally posted by jamie83

Originally posted by ClintK
Hey, that same group asked the oil company execs what was going on just a couple weeks ago. Why can't they get an alternative point of view? If anything, those oil execs would have a MUCH more biased point of view than Soros.

But that's okay because they come from the right wing conservative faction, huh?


No, you have it completely backwards.

The oil execs were called in to testify because the Congress already had accused them of not doing enough to stop the rise in oil prices. They were not seeking the oil execs opinion for the purpose of forming policy. They were dragging them into the arena so they could be seen attacking the evil oil execs who are making the price of gas go up so much.

And even so, it made FAR MORE sense to have oil execs than George Soros testify because the oil execs are in the oil business. Soros claimed he never trades oil, so what the heck was his alleged area of expertise on the subject?

[edit on 5-6-2008 by jamie83]


Uh, no, I don't have it "backwards." You have it wrong. The oil execs were NOT called in because congress had "already accused them" of anything. Congress wanted to know why gas prices were rising so fast and it asked them. Simple as that. Congress had never "ACCUSED" anybody -- except perhaps in your fantasy.

To say that it makes "more sense" to have oil execs testify because they are in the oil business is clear evidence that you aren't street wise about the real world. This is like asking a shady used car salesman who ripped someone off on a car to justify the price he charged. OF COURSE he's going to come up with some B.S. to justify the price.



new topics

top topics



 
2
<< 1   >>

log in

join