Reporter Warns Staged Financial Crisis Part Of Fascist Coup

Reporter Warns Staged Financial Crisis Part Of Fascist Coup

www.prisonplanet.com

A reporter for the left leaning alternative news website The Huffington Post has been attacked by neo-con bloggers and phony right-wing patriots after pointing out that the current financial crisis is part of an intentional coup to transfer unprecedented power to the Executive Branch and place public funds in the hands of the global corporate elite.

Writer Larisa Alexandrovna, makes a number of salient points in an article entitled “Welcome to the final stages of the coup…“.

Referring to the Bush administration’s “Wall Street bailout bill“, Alexandrovna warns that a fascist coup is in it’s closing stages, describing the proposed legislation as “treachery being conducted in the light of day.”

(visit the link for the full news article)


[edit on 22-9-2008 by The Revealer]

Mod Edit: Breaking News Forum Submission Guidelines – Please Review This Link.


[edit on 22/9/2008 by Mirthful Me]

www.prisonplanet.com
(visit the link for the full news article)

Dont believe it. The real coup happened when they killed Kennedy. The current situation is just the final fruition of there plans.

And dont trust AJ as far as you can throw him.

Starred and flagge, but this isn't really news to me. The financial crisises (sp?) have always been staged. At least as far back as Napoleon and the Rothschild takeover of England's bank.

What I find very mysterious about this whole banking crisis, is how all the banks had problems at the same exact time? That is ludicrous! There is no one that this many MAJOR organizations all HAPPEN to run out of money at the same exact time. No way, no how. And for this to make major headlines only now smells of an official cover-up. We were not hearing for months in advance how these companies were losing billions and could be bankrupt if something is not done. We did not find out until it was too late. These people had a responsiblity to their share holders and their clients and they got away with going under without informing those it mattered most too.

Here is Larisa's story in the Huffington Post

Welcome to the final stages of the coup...

reply to post by titorite


I do trust Alex Jones to some extent but he exaggerates too much. The man that I don't trust is Henry Paulson.

Normally i don't put much stock in AJ But his Crisis was caused by the same people that are suppose to fix it. Paulson and Bernanke.

heres a blog from a wall street insider. HERE

Thanks for the thread

Yes, this nothing more than an attempt for a private entity run by bankers to take hold with totalitarian powers over the people's government.

Like I posted on another thread this nothing more than manipulation to force congress into passing this bill.

The bail out is nothing but a bonus the real goal is the incredible powers that this dirty big fat rats are looking for.

Hi There,

Over the last few years the current incumbent 'mafiosa' government have sought (with subtle success) to use fear of terrorism as a means to gain the people's compliance and acceptance to ever-increasing draconial solutions to the so-called problem of terrorism. Never once, however, seeking to look into the causes of 'actual' terrorism, because the terrorism that is used against the people is not the terrorism of an acolyte of some obscure branch of a known religion, but that of manipulative, sociopathic, treasonous compatriots of the people.

The recent crises (still ongoing) in the financial markets, particularly within the American financial sectors, were/are domestic acts of economic and financial terrorism instigated through collusion with those pushing NWO agendas and the outgoing though current administration. There is something definitely wrong with Paulson's bill, and if ratified, I doubt it will be used for the purpose it is publicly intended to be used for. In fact, the image I have whilst thinking on it...is a gang of criminals running away down a darkend alley humping large sacks from which they are losing (in their panicky haste) thousand dollar bills.

I'm beginning to view the recent finance crises as a form of terrorism, because of the growing clamour to abolish the 'fed' and its system of 'reserve fractional banking'. The reaction by the fed is to deal out punitive punishment in the usual manner by contracting the availability of money and credit: thus, creating the current financial crisis. There is a solution to the problem, which is succinctly stated toward the end of the video "The Money Masters". I believe that Bush and his equally corrupt cronies have been and are culpable in the demise of their country, by being willing puppets of their fed masters.

Why would you want to sanction and ratify $700 billion dollars to this crew, when in the sanctioning of it, they can do whatever they wish with it, without there being any oversight or check on what they actually do with it? They could spirit it all out of the country or even syphon some of it off? Congress, it seems, is about to be left to face the music, to face the wrath and fury of the people. Meanwhile, the treasonous sellers of America think they are going to get away scott free with something of a bonus package. How audacious?



[edit on 22/9/08 by elysiumfire]

I hear the Treasury Secretary will aslo have the power to sell these bailed properties as he sees fit.

Most likely, right back to those who lost their a**.

Frineds in control of frineds losses, and friends repurchasing the same for pennies on the dollar.

If congress allows this kind of power to be controled by one man, the Treasury Secretary, then we are doomed.

reply to post by jackinthebox


yep and like they later took over US economy with the Federal reserve act in 1913.

follow the money

Originally posted by ninthaxis
What I find very mysterious about this whole banking crisis, is how all the banks had problems at the same exact time? That is ludicrous! There is no one that this many MAJOR organizations all HAPPEN to run out of money at the same exact time. No way, no how.

It makes sense, actually, if you think about WHY these companies are hemorrhaging money all at the same time. What do they all have in common?

Real estate. Mortgages, to be exact.

Over the past 10 years or so, property values started to skyrocket. Real estate became the thing everyone wanted, and as prices increased people continued to want to buy, thus driving the prices further and further up. You can see a perfect example of this with the popularity of such television shows as "Flip That House" and "Property Ladder" - people were making tens of thousands of dollars in profit by buying distressed properties, fixing them up, and reselling them (often within the span of a month or two) at huge profit.

Everyone got greedy. The average Joe with a middle class salary, used to overspending on credit, decided that a small two bedroom ranch home wasn't enough and he wanted a big McMansion. House flippers raked in tons of money selling McMansions. Mortgage brokers took a profit on each mortgage they facilitated. Mortgage lenders took a profit on each mortgage they wrote. Securities firms took a profit on each securitized mortgage they dealt with. Securities investors took massive profits on what they felt were "sure bets" (i.e. investing in people paying their mortgages). Insurers (*ahem*AIG*ahem*) took profit by insuring against people defaulting on their mortgages.

Now, this profit continues to flow as long as home prices stay high and as long as homeowners make their mortgage payments. It made a lot of people really, really rich.

People started playing dirty, wanting more profit. While there were then and are still now far too many people who feel entitled to a house they can't afford, mortgage brokers and lenders realized they had a few tools at their disposal to sell huge mortgages to people who normally wouldn't qualify. Remember, each mortgage sold means profit, so they started pumping out as many as they could. Subprime mortgages and adjustable rate mortgages, along with other "undesirable" mortgages, increased dramatically, and these mortgages went to people who are otherwise considered too risky to make a standard mortgage loan to (bad credit, high debt to income ratio, etc) or who intended to "flip" the house quickly.

In 2006, home values began to correct from their overinflated rates of the previous ~5 years. A home one bought for, say, $300k was re-appraised to a more true value of, say, $200k. This happened on a large scale, and many homeowners found they held a $300k mortgage on a house worth $200k. This is known as being "upside down" on your mortgage.
Coupled with the devaluation of home prices, the crummy mortgages (subprime, ARM, balloon, interest only, etc) came to peak. A homeowner who previously had a house payment of, say, $950 when they got the mortgage in 2003 would find their payment leaping to $1350 in 2006 when their interest rate was adjusted. Since many of the people with the non-fixed rate mortgages are living largely paycheck to paycheck (poor credit risks, remember), they could not afford the higher payment.

THEN you have to couple the above with what started happening in late 2005: fuel prices skyrocketing. Heating prices went way up, gas prices went up, food prices went up...everything went up, and many people simply did not have enough money to pay for groceries, heating bills, gas for the car, and their mortgage.

The foreclosures started in full force in late 2006. Not only were people losing their houses, but banks were unable to resell the house for what they had originally written the mortgage for, thus taking huge losses. A single homeowner may lose $100k in value of their house, but banks and investors were looking at thousands and thousands of individual mortgages losing value...billions and billions and billions of dollars in total.
On top of that, those further down the pipeline started feeling the crunch. Many lenders had previously packaged up mortgages into neat packages and resold those packages to securities firms and investors. As the foreclosures increased, the firms (Lehman, Merrill, Bear Sterns, etc) and investors who bought the mortgages started hemorrhaging money (early 2k7 to current).

Tertiary players, including AIG, began to fall too. AIG, for example, insured investors' investments in these mortgage securities. For each default (foreclosure), AIG was obligated to make a payout to those who had been paying insurance on their investments.

Foreclosures continue to increase, and more are to come. As the money began to drain away, stock prices began to plummet. Investment firms (i.e. Lehman, et al) were no longer able to offer enough collateral (holdings, stock value, etc) to secure bank loans to shore up their coffers. The companies simply ran out of money.

And here we are today, with these big companies out of money and stocks continuing to plummet. This has been building for ~2 years now, slowly at first. But like a snowball rolling down a mountain, it picked up mass and momentum faster and faster until it turned into the avalanche we're experiencing now.

Hmmmm. Well this pretty much explains it:

"A reporter for the left leaning alternative news website The Huffington Post has been attacked by neo-con bloggers and phony right-wing patriots after pointing out that the current financial crisis is part of an intentional coup to transfer unprecedented power to the Executive Branch and place public funds in the hands of the global corporate elite."

reply to post by anachryon


Excellent, excellent post! That was a very thought out and sensible explanation of what we are witnessing. What is outright disgusting however, is the push to provide so much power to a private entity with no recourse, review on how and where the money goes etc.

reply to post by anachryon


I understand the gist of what took place, but for all the companies to run out of money the same week, within days of each other, companies that had their own budgets and capital and clientel, that is beyond coincidence. I can see with the same quarter, or within the same year, but within days of each other is a stretch.

I just read the whole article .. on 1 point alone.. think about this statement she makes.. and i'll back it up where it's located in the...

legislative proposal from Treasury Department for authority to buy mortgage-related assets:

Furthermore, she points out that the bill states: Decisions by the Secretary pursuant to the authority of this Act are non-reviewable and committed to agency discretion, and may not be reviewed by any court of law or any administrative agency.

Treasury’s Financial-Bailout Proposal to Congress

Sec. 8. Review.

Decisions by the Secretary pursuant to the authority of this Act are non-reviewable and committed to agency discretion, and may not be reviewed by any court of law or any administrative agency.
source

it's word-for-word~!!!!!!

reply to post by Grey Magic


Yep, and then there is the whole scandal of that national bankruptcy of 1933 that literally left every citizen as an endentured servant to them on the bankrupted debt to this very day.

Originally posted by ninthaxis
I understand the gist of what took place, but for all the companies to run out of money the same week, within days of each other, companies that had their own budgets and capital and clientel, that is beyond coincidence. I can see with the same quarter, or within the same year, but within days of each other is a stretch.

In my understanding, the fact that the poo hit the fan has to do with people really and truly realizing what was going on behind closed doors - how much money had been lost.
Remember that a lot of a public company's value is based on its stock prices. If people see, for example, Lehman is in dire straits, then they take a closer look at Merrill, etc, see what's going on, and sell like crazy. Stock prices plummet, the company has even less financial leverage than it did before, and all the sudden they're floundering just as badly.

Don't mistake...some shady junk is going on for sure. I have no doubt about that. But the domino-type effect within days is largely a result of stock value.

reply to post by anachryon


Okay, that makes more sense to me now. I did not realize the implications of stock holders realizing all at once how much money the companies were losing.