It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

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

Thank you.


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


Unions and the Truth

page: 2
<< 1   >>

log in


posted on Mar, 29 2011 @ 01:43 AM
reply to post by crimvelvet

Here is part two

Traitors in the White House

SpartanKingLeonidas covers the house of Bush here:

I will start with Colonel Edward Mandell House who literally lived in the White House as an advisor to President Woodrow Wilson. Col. House is the guy who helped to pick the charter members of the original Federal Reserve Board.

Edward Mandell House had this to say in a private meeting with President Woodrow Wilson:

“[Very] soon, every American will be required to register their biological property in a national system designed to keep track of the people and that will operate under the ancient system of pledging. By such methodology, we can compel people to submit to our agenda, which will effect our security as a chargeback for our fiat paper currency. Every American will be forced to register or suffer being unable to work and earn a living. They will be our chattel, and we will hold the security interest over them forever, by operation of the law merchant under the scheme of secured transactions.

Americans, by unknowingly or unwittingly delivering the bills of lading to us will be rendered bankrupt and insolvent, forever to remain economic slaves through taxation, secured by their pledges. They will be stripped of their rights and given a commercial value designed to make us a profit and they will be none the wiser, for not one man in a million could ever figure our plans and, if by accident one or two should figure it out, we have in our arsenal plausible deniability. After all, this is the only logical way to fund government, by floating liens and debt to the registrants in the form of benefits and privileges. This will inevitably reap to us huge profits beyond our wildest expectations and leave every American a contributor to this fraud which we will call “Social Insurance.” Without realizing it, every American will insure us for any loss we may incur and in this manner, every American will unknowingly be our servant, however begrudgingly. The people will become helpless and without any hope for their redemption and, we will employ the high office of the President of our dummy corporation to foment this plot against America.”

Rather a prophetic statement isn't it???

posted on Mar, 29 2011 @ 01:51 AM
reply to post by crimvelvet

on to part three and the next Traitor:
The "great and much admired" FDR... May he rot in the ninth circle of Hades!

F.D.R. - My Exploited Father-in-Law
by Curtis B. Dall
Pg. 111:
Harry Hopkins, to aid the internationalists' program, was planted in the White House by the Advisors after Louis Howe's death. Thus, Harry Hopkins became a "second Colonel House", close to FDR. Hopkins operated far more openly as an internationalist puppet, pointing to one world government via a long range strategy route, operating right from the White House....

Dall, who was married to Franklin Roosevelt's daughter Anna, spent many nights at the White House and often guided FDR around in his wheelchair. He was also a partner at a Wall Street brokerage....

could not avoid several disheartening conclusions in his book. He portrays the legendary president not as a leader but as a "quarterback" with little actual power. The "coaching staff" consisted of a coterie of handlers ("advisers" like Louis Howe, Bernard Baruch and Harry Hopkins) who represented the international banking cartel. For Dall, FDR ultimately was a traitor manipulated by "World Money" ....

But FDR advisers Henry Morgenthau and Harry Dexter White arranged for U.S. treasury printing plates to be sent to Russia so the Communists could print their own US money. They arranged $8 billion in lend lease aid to Russia after the war was over. Col. Dall personally confronted Louis Howe over Russian agents he saw meeting Howe in the White House. FDR Advisors as Wall Street Bankers were for supporting Communism...

Harry Dexter White was a soviet agent and a senior U.S. Treasury department official. He was the man behind the Bretton Woods Conference, that gave us of the World Bank and the IMF (International Monetary Fund). (This is where a lot of US tax payer money ends up including the "Bank Bailouts")

The world Bank and IMF strong arm third world countries and are the cause of much suffering by the people and profit for the bankers and corporations. (Think "Confessions of an Economic Hitman" by Perkins) Also see the Structural Adjustment Programs

Letter of resignation from IMF: 'To me, resignation is a priceless liberation, for with it I have taken the first big step to that place where I may hope to wash my hands of what in my mind's eye is the blood of millions of poor and starving peoples. Mr. Camdessus, the blood is so much, you know, it runs in rivers.'

FDR was the President responsible for the confiscation of US citizen gold which he gave to the bankers. Excerpts from Congressman McFadden's Speeches:

..."Some people who think that the Federal Reserve Banks United States Government institutions. They are private monopolies which prey upon the people of these United States for the benefit of themselves and their foreign customers;...

"These twelve private credit monopolies were deceitfully and disloyally foisted upon this Country by the bankers who came here from Europe and repaid us our hospitality by undermining our American institutions. Those bankers took money out of this Country to finance Japan in a war against Russia. They created a reign of terror in Russia with our money in order to help that war along. They instigated the separate peace between Germany and Russia, and thus drove a wedge between the allies in World War. They financed Trotsky's passage from New York to Russia so that he might assist in the destruction of the Russian Empire. They fomented and instigated the Russian Revolution, and placed a large fund of American dollars at Trotsky's disposal in one of their branch banks in Sweden so that through him Russian homes might be thoroughly broken up and Russian children flung far and wide from their natural protectors. They have since begun breaking up of American homes and the dispersal of American children. "Mr. Chairman, there should be no partisanship in matters concerning banking and currency affairs in this Country, and I do not speak with any....

"By his unlawful usurpation of power on the night of March 5, 1933, and by his proclamation, which in my opinion was in violation of the Constitution of the United States, Roosevelt divorced the currency of the United States from gold, and the United States currency is no longer protected by gold. It is therefore sheer dishonesty to say that the people's gold is needed to protect the currency.

"Roosevelt ordered the people to give their gold to private interests- that is, to banks, and he took control of the banks so that all the gold and gold values in them, or given into them, might be handed over to the predatory International Bankers who own and control the Fed.

"Roosevelt cast his lot with the usurers. "He agreed to save the corrupt and dishonest at the expense of the people of the United States.

"He took advantage of the people's confusion and weariness and spread the dragnet over the United States to capture everything of value that was left in it. He made a great haul for the International Bankers.

"The Prime Minister of England came here for money! He came here to collect cash!

"He came here with Fed Currency and other claims against the Fed which England had bought up in all parts of the world. And he has presented them for redemption in gold....

The Elite are not about to lose money as this shows:

In 1976 A typical American CEO earned 36 times as much as the average worker. By 2008 the average CEO pay increased to 369 times that of the average worker.

So what has happened to all the gold the citizen's gave to the US government???

The Great American Disaster: How Much Gold Remains In Fort Knox?

....The US dollar of August, 1971 is as of 2009 worth just over 18 cents, according to the Inflation Calculator. Thus, in purchasing power, the dollar has lost over 80% in the past 39 years.

Only foreigners were legally able to turn in their US dollars and get gold from the US Government from 1934 to 1971. August 15 of that year closed off that last power of convertibility.

In 1934, gold was confiscated from US citizens, melted from coins into bars, and gathered over the next few years into a new storage facility at Ft Knox, Kentucky....

The peak amount of gold held in Fort Knox reached 701 million ounces of gold. This was in 1949. This amount equaled 69.9% of all the gold in the world...

From then until 1972, at least 75% of official US gold left the nation in exchange for paper dollars which can be printed at will. However, I think the total amount of real gold which remains is even less. The exact amount that remains is now officially listed at 147.3 million ounces. From the peak, that is a decline of 79%....

When President Nixon closed the gold window exactly 39 years ago, Durell began hearing rumors that made him concerned about the amount and quality of the gold that remained in Fort Knox....

...on September 23, 1974 Mary Brooks, the Director of the US Mint, led six Congressmen and one Senator on a tour of Ft Knox. It was the first time since Franklin Roosevelt visited on April 28, 1943 that anyone except Mint and Treasury officials had been allowed inside of Ft Knox. Too my
knowledge, no outsider has been inside ever since.

The only audit that has ever been done of the gold inside Ft Knox was done days after Dwight Eisenhower became President in January of 1953...

The central problem was that it wasn't much of an audit. To sum it up:

1. Representatives of the audited group were allowed to make the rules governing the audit. No outside private experts were allowed.

2. Those government bureaucrats involved were inexperienced in their tasks, by their own admission.

3. The entire audit of the largest gold hoard ever concentrated in history lasted only seven days.

4. Only a fraction of the gold was actually tested. Later, the officials put this fraction at just 5%.

5. Based on that fraction, the official committee reported that, in their opinion, all the holdings would have matched their records if they'd all been tested.

6. If the audit was accurate, the fact remains that almost 80% of it went overseas in the coming years. If the audit was not accurate, the amount of gold lost could have been even more.

The shocking admission Ft Knox holds very little good delivery gold was made to Mr. Durell by the chief official of the General Accounting Office (GAO). This happened a few months after the September 1974 tour.

posted on Mar, 29 2011 @ 02:08 AM

Originally posted by neo96
reply to post by OLD HIPPY DUDE

the reasons businessess leave the states are as following :

1. unions
2. human resources such as education and people who are willing to do anything for a job china and india lead the world in people and actually do goto college.
3. regulations

its a free country you can be pro union all you want to be but having been a union member for over 10 years this is one opinion i have a right to have.

It sounds like you've left the thread in a huff, which is a shame. Really though, do you actually believe that?

1. Of course business' hate unions, unions cost money. When a rich CEO has to give up his piece of the billion dollar pie so his employees can maybe get some time off, he can afford to leave while leaving his employees in poverty. That's a great world to live in.

2. Do anything for a job. How disgusting a concept is that? If the Chinese were truly Marxist communists they wouldn't get paid so horribly or treated so poorly. Big business' go there for the cheap slave labor. Is that what you think every worker is or should be? Cheap slave labor?!

3. I hope to god there are more regulations on the way. Financial collapse? Let's loosen regulations even MORE! Big banks are so capable of policing themselves, obviously. Poisoned drinking water from fracking? Eh...regulations would hurt the bottom line and we might see prices go up. An extra $0.02/gallon of water or sick and dying people all across the country...options, options.

4. What taxes? That 35% tax rate? Find me a major corporation in this country that actually pays that amount. Please, somebody. Any national companies out there that pay that amount?!

If you aren't for unions and workers you're for the elite few that promise you, if you work just hard enough, you too might be able to join their club...maybe. It's a crock and I wish you would recognize that.

posted on Mar, 29 2011 @ 02:29 AM
reply to post by crimvelvet

part three


We next come to the "Much Loved" Bill Clinton with the blood of millions of starving children on his hands.

Let's start with his campaign Contributions and CHINA:

Justice Department Investigation

• Overview: In late 1996, a Justice Department task force started investigating allegations of campaign fund-raising abuses by the Clinton reelection campaign. Critics accused Attorney General Janet Reno of botching the investigation and demanded that she appoint an independent counsel.....

Huang to Offer Guilty Plea
May 26, 1999
The Justice Department announced that John Huang has agreed to plead guilty to a single felony charge as part of an agreement that legal sources said promises that he will not be prosecuted in connection with his fund-raising for President Clinton.

Trie to Plead Guilty
May 22, 1999
Controversial fund-raiser Yah Lin "Charlie" Trie entered into a plea agreement with the Justice Department, winning leniency in exchange for telling all in an investigation of improper campaign contributions originating in China.

Not Chinese Agent, Chung Says
May 12, 1999
Former Democratic fund-raiser Johnny Chung told a congressional committee that he received $300,000 from a Chinese general interested in influencing the 1996 presidential election. But he insisted that he "never acted as an agent for the Chinese government."

You can read the rest HERE:

At this point it should be noted that China has built its own "Fort Knox" and is amassing gold.

The Wall Street Journal reports Friday that gold prices are soaring to record highs as a new powerful factor has emerged as a driver of that rally — China.
According to the Journal, China is now buying huge amounts of gold ...
key data released by China’s state-run Xinhua news agency showing that China imported 209.7 metric tons of gold in the first 10 months of this year. That’s a five hundred percent increase compared to the same period in 2009...

Jun 18, 2010 ... As the world's largest producer of the metal, China often buys gold from its own mines and doesn't report those sales publicly...

The People's Bank of China(PBOC) recommended yesterday that 1 billion Chinese consider buying gold as a hedge against inflation ;

CHEAP ENERGY is a must for manufacturing:
China is now building two power plants every week, says the UK's top climate change envoy:

China is building 500 coal plants over the next ten years:

China to build 60 nuclear reactors over next decade
China plans to build six nuclear power plants a year over the next decade, increasing its nuclear power capacity to more than 70 gigawatts by 2020, according to a top official of a nuclear power company.

Back to Clinton and FOOD

Clinton set up the present economic mess ON PURPOSE with the ratification of WTO, NAFTA, entry of China into the WTO, The “Freedom to Fail” 1996 Farm bill.

Dan Amstutz was VP of Cargill. He wrote the WTO Agreement on Ag in 1995. (Even Clinton admitted that agreement lead to starvation and riots of 2008) Amstutz then wrote the Freedom to Farm act in 1996. This law was later called the Freedom to Fail act as US farmers over produced and grain prices dropped like a rock. Grain traders used the surplus of very cheap grain to bankrupt farmers around the world. This was actually a KNOWN US policy as Clinton has just admitted.

Today's global food crisis shows "we all blew it, including me when I was president," by treating food crops as commodities instead of as a vital right of the world's poor, Bill Clinton told a U.N. gathering on Thursday. UNITED NATIONS, Oct. 23, 2008

President Bill Clinton... publicly apologized last month for forcing Haiti to drop tariffs on imported, subsidized US rice during his time in office. The policy wiped out Haitian rice farming and seriously damaged Haiti’s ability to be self-sufficient.

Amstutz then went to work for Goldman Sachs. This has always puzzled me until I finally ran across the last piece of the puzzle.

That is where things get really interesting. This is stolen from WANTtoKNOW. Info: Excerpts of Key Financial News Articles in Major Media

The first articles states:

Commodity Futures Trading Commission judge says colleague biased against complainants

..Painter said Judge Bruce Levine ... had a secret agreement with a former Republican chairwoman of the agency to stand in the way of investors filing complaints with the agency. "On Judge Levine's first week on the job, nearly twenty years ago, he came into my office and stated that he had promised Wendy Gramm, then Chairwoman of the Commission, that we would never rule in a complainant's favor," Painter wrote. "A review of his rulings will confirm that he fulfilled his vow....

Levine had never ruled in favor of an investor. Gramm [wife of former senator Phil Gramm (R-Tex.)], was head of the CFTC just before president Bill Clinton took office. She has been criticized by Democrats for helping firms such as Goldman Sachs and Enron gain influence over the commodity markets. After leaving the CFTC, she joined Enron's board.

Note: For lots more from reliable sources on government corruption, click here.

NOW we know WHY Goldman Sachs hired Dan Amstutz!

The second Article states:

How Goldman gambled on starvation

This is the story of how some of the richest people in the world – Goldman, Deutsche Bank, the traders at Merrill Lynch, and more – have caused the starvation of some of the poorest people in the world. At the end of 2006, food prices across the world started to rise, suddenly and stratospherically. Within a year, the price of wheat had shot up by 80 per cent, maize by 90 per cent, rice by 320 per cent. In a global jolt of hunger, 200 million people – mostly children – couldn't afford to get food any more, and sank into malnutrition or starvation. There were riots in more than 30 countries, and at least one government was violently overthrown. Then, in spring 2008, prices just as mysteriously fell back to their previous level. Jean Ziegler, the UN Special Rapporteur on the Right to Food, calls it "a silent mass murder", entirely due to "man-made actions." Through the 1990s, Goldman Sachs and others lobbied hard and the regulations [controlling agricultural futures contracts] were abolished. Suddenly, these contracts were turned into "derivatives" that could be bought and sold among traders who had nothing to do with agriculture. A market in "food speculation" was born. The speculators drove the price through the roof.

Note: For an abundance of reports from major media sources detailing the many complex and hidden strategies employed by financial corporations to keep their hyper-profits flowing in, click here.

Here is the attitude of these sons of female dogs:

In summary, we have record low grain inventories globally as we move into a new crop year. We have demand growing strongly. Which means that going forward even small crop failures are going to drive grain prices to record levels. As an investor, we continue to find these long term trends...very attractive.” Food shortfalls predicted: 2008

Recently there have been increased calls for the development of a U.S. or international grain reserve to provide priority access to food supplies for Humanitarian needs. The National Grain and Feed Association (NGFA) and the North American Export Grain Association (NAEGA) strongly advise against this concept..Stock reserves have a documented depressing effect on prices... and resulted in less aggressive market bidding for the grains.” July 22, 2008 letter to President Bush

The World Trade Organization also accelerated the mass exodus of American jobs to overseas. Statistics (courtesy of Bridgewater) showed in 1990,before the Clinton era and before WTO was ratified, Foreign ownership of U.S. assets amounted to 33% of U.S. GDP. By 2002 this had increased to over 70% of U.S. GDP.

Clinton and BANKING LAWS

Clinton's signing of laws that repealed the McFadden Act of 1927, the Glass-Steagall Act of 1933 and the Bank Holding Company Act of 1956 lead to the Formation of Mega Banks. He is also responsible for the Housing and Community Development Act of 1992 and the Commodity Futures Modernization Act of 2000 that was responsible for marginal mortgage loans doomed to fail and the unregulated CDSs used to insure the banks against foreclosure.

A list of important banking laws can be found here:

The critical part of the Banksters scam was the Commodity Futures Modernization Act. This allowed CDSs to be placed on mortgages. If a bank has a couple of CDSs on your mortgage then the bank WANTS to force you into foreclosure See: How the AIG Bailout Could be Driving More Foreclosures

..because the CDSs were unregulated—and this is because of a specific law back in the year 2000 called the Commodity Futures Modernization Act, which was sponsored by Phil Gramm. These instruments were unregulated. They were designated outside the regulation of—they couldn’t be regulated as futures commodities or as gaming, so there were no rules about this. So you could sell as much CDS protection as you wanted, but you didn’t have to actually post any capital when you did it....

...a lot of these contracts, these CDS contracts, are like gambling, in the sense that—normally when you buy an insurance policy, you’re buying a policy on a house that you actually own. With these CDS contracts, you could actually bet on somebody else’s mortgage....

Here are the other laws that set up the AIG Bailout - Foreclosuregate:
(I rearranged the order and added comments)

The McFadden Act of 1927 or Amendment to the National Banking Laws and the Federal Reserve Act (P.L. 69-639, 44 STAT. 1224): Prohibited interstate banking.

[Clinton's Law: Negating above:]
Riegle-Neal Interstate Banking and Branching Efficiency Act of 1994 (P.L. 103-328, 108 STAT. 2338).
Permits bank holding companies to acquire banks in any state one year Beginning June 1, 1997, allows interstate mergers.

The Glass-Steagall Act or Banking Act of 1933 (P.L. 73-66, 48 STAT. 162): Separated commercial banking from investment banking, establishing them as separate lines of commerce.

Bank Holding Company Act of 1956 (P.L. 84-511, 70 STAT. 133): Prohibited bank holding companies headquartered in one state from acquiring a bank in another state.

[Clinton's Law: Negating both of the above laws:]
Gramm-Leach-Bliley Act of 1999 (P.L. 106-102, 113 STAT 1338)
(pdf version from Government Printing Office.)
Repeals last vestiges of the Glass Steagall Act of 1933. Modifies portions of the Bank Holding Company Act to allow affiliations between banks and insurance underwriters. Law creates a new financial holding company authorized to engage in: underwriting and selling insurance and securities, conducting both commercial and merchant banking, investing in and developing real estate and other "complimentary activities."
Allows national banks to underwrite municipal bonds.
Amends the Community Reinvestment Act to require that financial holding companies can not be formed before their insured depository institutions receive and maintain a satisfactory CRA rating.
Makes significant changes in the operation of the Federal Home Loan Bank System, easing membership requirements and loosening restrictions on the use of FHLB funds.

[MORE on The Clinton Years:]
Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation Improvement Act of 1991 (P.L. 102-242, 105 STAT. 2236).
Also known as FDICIA. FDICIA greatly increased the powers and authority of the FDIC. Major provisions recapitalized the Bank Insurance Fund and allowed the FDIC to strengthen the fund by borrowing from the Treasury.
The act mandated a least-cost resolution method and prompt resolution approach to problem and failing banks and ordered the creation of a risk-based deposit insurance assessment scheme. Brokered deposits and the solicitation of deposits were restricted, as were the non-bank activities of insured state banks. FDICIA created new supervisory and regulatory examination standards and put forth new capital requirements for banks. It also expanded prohibitions against insider activities and created new Truth in Savings provisions.
[TRANSLATION: Allowed big banks to gobble up smaller banks more easily.]

Housing and Community Development Act of 1992 (P.L. 102-550, 106 STAT. 3672).

RTC Completion Act (P.L. 103-204, 107 STAT. 2369):
implement provisions designed to improve the agency's record in providing business opportunities to minorities and women.. Expands the existing affordable housing programs of the RTC and the FDIC by broadening the potential affordable housing stock of the two agencies.
Increases the statute of limitations on RTC civil lawsuits. In cases in which the statute of limitations has expired, claims can be revived for fraud and intentional misconduct resulting in unjust enrichment or substantial loss to the thrift.

Important Banking Legislation

The housing market collapse lead to a drastic drop in land prices and no buyers. It is absolutely NO coincidence that the Food Safety Modernization Act of 2010, guaranteeing the loss of America's independent farmers and Obamacare containing the 1099 change severely hampering small business growth and formation were just passed.

WHO does Clinton actually owes allegiance to?

Cecil Rhodes, one of the wealthiest men in the world, left Leopold de Rothschild (1845-1917) to administered his estate after his death in 1902 and set up the Rhodes Scholarship. Leo was the youngest son of of Nathan Mayer Rothschild.

Before Tony Blair became British Prime Minister in May 1997, he was Chairman of the Fabian Society...

...the Rhodes Scholarship Program at Oxford to indoctrinate promising young graduates for the purpose, and also establish a secret society for leading business and banking leaders around the world who would work for the City to bring in their Socialist world government.

Rothschild appointed Lord Alfred Milner to implement the plan.

At first the society was called Milner's Kindergarten, then in 1909 it came to be called The RoundTable.

It was to work closely with the London School of Economics founded in 1894 by Fabian Socialist leader Sidney Webb (Lord Passfield).

Today former Rhodes Scholars (such as Bill Clinton), Fabian Business Round Table members, and graduates from the London School of Economics (the primary Fabian Socialist training school in the world) dominate the global banking, business and political systems in every country...

The British Fabian Society plan to takeover the world by the City of London financial community was first published in a book entitled "All These Things" by a New Zealand author and journalist, A. N. Field....

Centered around City of London ...the Bankers Industrial Development Company, the essence of the document "Freedom and Planning" was (and still is) to gradually"Sovietize" the world based on their "Five Year Plan" inaugurated in Moscow in 1927-28 in the Soviet Union.

Basically the plan involved the subtle transfer of the entire productive capacity of each country throughout the world into a series of great "State-owned" departments, which would then be "corporatized", then "privatized" to City of London Corporation International banks and corporations which they control.

Individual property ownership would be severely restricted, with most of the land, sea, fisheries, rivers, lakes, ports, railways, communications, media, roads, electricity, energy, food, water, waste management, housing, farms, commercial property, schools, hospitals, police, social welfare, Inland Revenue etc. transferred into statutory corporations, companies or land trusts which indirectly would be owned by City of London banks.

The"peasants" would still be allowed to own their own clothes, and small assets like furniture, cars and boats etc., but the main assets of each country would be owned by their multi-national corporations and banks.

Sure sounds like Col. House in the first of my three posts!

Col. House Fabian Society Connection:

...The story of the British connection to the Council on Foreign Relations may be traced back to George Peabody, J.P. Morgan, Andrew Carnegie, Nicholas M. Butler and Col. Edward House -- all who may be described a British loyalists. A Secret Society was established by Cecil Rhodes in connection with Rothschild, Morgan, Carnegie, and Rockefeller. A small highly secret group called the Round Table directed operations...

A Texan named House was a key individual before and during the Wilson administration. He helped establish the income tax, the Federal Reserve System, coined the phrase "league of nations," drafted the covenant for the League of Nations and presided over the creation of the Council on Foreign Relations (C.F.R.).

Col. Edward M. House (the title came from a Texas Governor) inherited a fortune estimated at around $1.5 million. He was born in Houston, Texas -- the son of a wealthy planter and banker. (38) Originally the House ("Huis") family was Dutch. House's family had lived in England for 300 years before his father came to Texas. (39) Thomas William House came to Texas to fight under Sam Houston and was an American agent for London Banking interests "said by some to the House of Rothschild..." (40) Edward House attended school in England for several years as a young boy: "Much of his youth and adult life was spent in the British Isles, which he regularly visited." (41) The elder House said he wanted to raise his sons to "know and serve England." (42) House surrounded himself with prominent members of the Fabian Society. (43) Between 1892 and 1902 he elected four Texas Governors. (44)

In the winter of 1911-1912, House wrote Philip Dru: Administrator. House said he was working for "Socialism as dreamed of by Karl Marx..." The book was a fictional plan for the conquest of America by gaining control of both the Republican and Democratic parties and using them to create a socialist world government....

posted on Mar, 29 2011 @ 02:31 AM
reply to post by crimvelvet

I am cross-eyed at this point and will get to Reagan tomorrow.

I do not expect anyone is reading this right now anyway.

posted on Mar, 29 2011 @ 11:03 AM
reply to post by crimvelvet

Reagan's Administration was the Era of the Hostile Takeover aka Leverage buyouts.
First you have to understand what a “Leveraged buyout” IS.

A leveraged buyout (or LBO, or highly-leveraged transaction (HLT), or "bootstrap" transaction) occurs when an investor, typically financial sponsor, acquires a controlling interest in a company's equity and where a significant percentage of the purchase price is financed through leverage (borrowing). The assets of the acquired company are used as collateral for the borrowed capital, sometimes with assets of the acquiring company. Typically, leveraged buyout uses a combination of various debt instruments from bank and debt capital markets...

The leveraged buyout boom of the 1980s was conceived by a number of corporate financiers, most notably Jerome Kohlberg, Jr. and later his protégé Henry Kravis. Working for Bear Stearns at the time, Kohlberg and Kravis, along with Kravis' cousin George Roberts, began a series of what they described as "bootstrap" investments...

Notice the PROPERTY used for COLLATERAL of these loans was NOT owned by the Corporate Raiders! THIS is nothing more than THEFT and FRAUD! It would be like me looking at the 500 acres owned free and clear by a couple of retirees and I go to the bank and get a mortgage using that land as collateral.

This is not moral or ethical and given what happened during the Great Depression, I would be very surprised if laws were not enacted to prevent it.

Where the heck was CONGRESS. Where the heck were the COURTS when this was going on??? If you want to do one single thing to help America get back on her feet, then Declare Leveraged Buyouts ILLEGAL. They are certainly immoral and very destructive to the country.

So what did the US government do about this highly unethical practices???

...In January 1982, former US Secretary of the Treasury William Simon and a group of investors acquired Gibson Greetings, a producer of greeting cards, for $80 million, of which only $1 million was rumored to have been contributed by the investors. By mid-1983, just sixteen months after the original deal, Gibson completed a $290 million IPO and Simon made approximately $66 million.[9] The success of the Gibson Greetings investment attracted the attention of the wider media to the nascent boom in leveraged buyouts.[10] Between 1979 and 1989, it was estimated that there were over 2,000 leveraged buyouts valued in excess of $250 billion.....

A US Secretary of the Treasury started the sellout of our economy. Reagan through his laissez faire attitude did nothing to stop it.

...Both economic and regulatory factors combined to spur the explosion in large takeovers and, in turn, large LBOs. The three regulatory factors were the Reagan administration's relatively laissez-faire policies on antitrust and securities laws, which allowed mergers the government would have challenged in earlier years; the 1982 Supreme Court decision striking down state antitakeover laws (which were resurrected with great effectiveness in the late eighties); and deregulation of many industries, which prompted restructurings and mergers. The main economic factor was the development of the original-issue high-yield debt instrument. The so-called "junk bond" innovation, pioneered by Michael Milken of Drexel Burnham, provided many hostile bidders and LBO firms with the enormous amounts of capital needed to finance multi-billion-dollar

Without intervention greed took over.

Corporate takeovers became a prominent feature of the American business landscape during the seventies and eighties. A hostile takeover usually involves a public tender offer—a public offer of a specific price, usually at a substantial premium over the prevailing market price, good for a limited period, for a substantial percentage of the target firm's stock. Unlike a merger, which requires the approval of the target firm's board of directors as well as voting approval of the stockholders, a tender offer can provide voting control to the bidding firm without the approval of the target's management and directors.....

Because it allows bidders to seek control directly from shareholders—by going "over the heads" of target management—the tender offer is the most powerful weapon available to the hostile bidder. ... Although hostile bidders still need a formal merger to gain total control of the target's assets, this is easily accomplished once the bidder has purchased a majority of voting stock.

Hostile tender offers have been around for decades, but they were rare and generally involved small target firms until the midseventies. Then came the highly controversial multibillion-dollar hostile takeovers of very recognizable public companies. By the late eighties there were dozens of multi-billion-dollar takeovers and their cousins, leveraged buyouts (LBOs). The largest acquisition ever was the $25 billion buyout of RJR Nabisco by Kolberg Kravis and Roberts in 1989. [Editor's note: this was written in 1992.] ....

This is the result of the 1980's leveraged buyout feeding frenzy.

Of mergers and acquisitions each costing $1 million or more, there were just 10 in 1970; in 1980, there were 94; in 1986, there were 346. A third of such deals in the 1980's were hostile. The 1980's also saw a wave of giant leveraged buyouts. Mergers, acquisitions and L.B.O.'s, which had accounted for less than 5 percent of the profits of Wall Street brokerage houses in 1978, ballooned into an estimated 50 percent of profits by 1988...

THROUGH ALL THIS, THE HISTORIC RELATIONSHIP between product and paper has been turned upside down. Investment bankers no longer think of themselves as working for the corporations with which they do business. These days, corporations seem to exist for the investment bankers.... In fact, investment banks are replacing the publicly held industrial corporations as the largest and most powerful economic institutions in America....

THERE ARE SIGNS THAT A VICIOUS spiral has begun, as each corporate player seeks to improve its standard of living at the expense of another's.

Corporate raiders transfer to themselves, and other shareholders, part of the income of employees by forcing the latter to agree to lower wages.

January 29, 1989 New York Times

America has been quietly sold off piece by piece. This is a sampling of the industries with over 50% foreign ownership, according to Source Watch

* Sound recording industries - 97%
* Commodity contracts dealing and brokerage - 79%
* Motion picture and sound recording industries - 75%
* Metal ore mining - 65%
* Wineries and distilleries - 64%
* Database, directory, Book and other publishers - 63%
* Cement, concrete, lime, and gypsum product - 62%
* Engine, turbine and power transmission equipment - 57%
* Rubber product - 53%
* Nonmetallic mineral product manufacturing - 53%
* Plastics and rubber products manufacturing - 52%
* Other insurance related activities - 51%
* Boiler, tank, and shipping container - 50%
* Glass and glass product – 48%
* Coal mining – 48%

A real eye opener isn't it. But it gets worse. The Department of Homeland Security says 80% of our ports are operated by Foreigners and they are buying and running US bridges and toll roads.

Statistics (courtesy of Bridgewater) showed in 1990,before WTO was ratified, Foreign ownership of U.S. assets amounted to 33% of U.S. GDP. By 2002 this had increased to over 70% of U.S. GDP.

The problem is getting worse as this more recent article shows.

I've written on this before (and also here, and here).  In the 1980s during the great takeover boom and hollowing out of the industrial heartland, many states adopted amendments to their corporate codes that codified directors' fiduciary duties, so-called "constituency statutes".  In general, these provisions made it clear that a director need not "maximize shareholder value."  Rather, in complying with their fiduciary obligations, directors may take all sorts of things into consideration - the impact of their decisions on various constituencies, including employees, the community, the environment, the color of the sky, whatever...

When these statutes were first passed, they were heralded as way to protect jobs, etc....

My problem with these statutes is that they strike me as a bit of a head fake.  While they certainly give boards the power they need to protect local communities, etc should they so desire, they don't actually require directors to protect those constituencies.  In effect, such statutes, simply give directors another fiduciary lever to pull when negotiating with a potential acquirer.  

I've said this before, but you know a board might be very concerned about the impact of a potential acquisition on employees and the community when the bid is $69.  At $75, the board's concerns about the impact on the community might start to fall away. Why not move the HQ to Paris?  It's so much nicer there than Cambridge.   At $85?  Employees ... we have employees?!  

There's no requirement that a board share the incremental price increase with those stakeholders who will lose out when a transaction is ultimately done.....

‘Whitewashed Windows and Vacant Stores’
As I drive around my town, I can’t get the lyrics or somber melody out of my head. It is like witnessing old friends drop dead one by one.

Last week I went into town to buy some guitar strings. Band Central Station, a friend of 30 years, was gone. In its place? Nothing....

And, it isn’t just small enterprises. We lost a Circuit City, a Chevrolet dealership, tried-and-true franchises like Dairy Queen and Arby’s. Last week Sam’s Club announced it will close its local big box bulk store. Then came news that Wal-Mart, the parent company, intends to lay off 10,000 Sam’s Club Employees. Even the ubiquitous 99 cent stores have been cut in half....

So, the businesses that provided jobs are gone, the office and retail space sits vacant, likely in default. The windows get broken, the walls get tagged, the weeds grow, trash blows, and, with no one to stop it, nature begins the process of permanent destruction. The value of those businesses and real estate is now gone.
Each of these failed enterprises is a sad testament to the times we live in, but taken in their entirety, they foretell an even grimmer future. It will be a longtime before the jobs return...

The failure of Linen’s and Things is a prime example of how Wall Street plundered Main Street, robbing retailers, big and small, and leaving a trail of failure, unemployment and boarded up buildings behind.
Once Wall Street realized that success can only be so profitable but failure has unlimited potential, the race was on to loan money and securitize the debt.
....You might be familiar with the mall-based, teen-focused, accessories chain, Claire’s Stores. It was taken over in 2007 by Apollo Management LP for $3.1 billion. At the time, the chain had over $245 million in cash on hand. Today, the cash is gone. Struggling under the weight of $2.3 billion in debt, sales continue to decline....

Underlying all of this are the same activities that led to losses in sub-prime residential equities. Money was looking for a home, and some investors saw that cash could be leveraged out of these enterprises by buying them with someone else’s money and looting the assets.
The making of more and bigger loans was driven by the fees and bonuses Wall Street could earn by finding a home for private equity. They didn’t care about the quality of loans because, just like sub prime mortgages, these loans were being pooled into securities and sold.
As the market overheated, it became a breeding ground for fraud. A flurry of new court cases reveals the disturbing extent to which commercial mortgage borrowers may have doctored loan documents...
The counter parties who sold the default swaps, but only have fractional reserves to offset losses will have to turn to the government for further bailouts or not pay the banks. That is why AIG was bailed out in 2007. Should we do it again?
The investors in these commercial properties, pension funds, hedge funds, etc. will bear the losses, and will probably bring numerous class action law suits against the originators of the investment pools, further tying up vacant commercial property until the case makes it’s way through court.
But, as these were mostly Special Purpose Vehicles, registered in the Cayman Islands, the enormous profits are not only unrecoverable but cannot be taxed.
Everyone says it’s the economy and that we are “coming out of it” as though it were all a drug-induced haze. But, we aren’t coming out of anything, we are going deeper. Nothing has improved except Wall Street compensation. We still don’t make anything, export anything, or do anything that is creating marketplace returns sufficient for the profits of these firms.

They aren’t living off of the fruits of our excess, or adding value, they are eating the seed corn.

posted on Mar, 29 2011 @ 11:24 AM
reply to post by crimvelvet

These are the Security and Exchange laws that SHOULD have protected US industry from the Corporate Raiders and predatory banking practices.

Unions can not get good wages out of a turnip. With the Raiders/Banksters stripping businesses of their wealth the businesses had no choice but to cut benefits and wages.

I worked for a very good corporation with great benefits. It had NO Debt. It owned its own land, factories and even their own power plant. Life insurance, pensions and even medical benefits were all company "owned" The company even loaned employees money for higher education for themselves and their families at a low rate. It was just the type of wealthy corporation the Raiders love.

Now it has been riped apart, the land sold, the factory equipment packed up and shipped overseas (I know the guy who did the shipping) and thousands of employees are out of work.

This is why Unions striking is NOT the solution to the problem. Low wages/unemployment is a symptom of a much bigger disease that simple corporate greed.


Securities Exchange – About the Laws:

The Laws That Govern the Securities Industry_

Securities Exchange Act of 1934
With this Act, Congress created the Securities and Exchange Commission. The Act empowers the SEC with broad authority over all aspects of the securities industry. This includes the power to register, regulate, and oversee brokerage firms, transfer agents, and clearing agencies as well as the nation's securities self regulatory organizations (SROs). The various stock exchanges, such as the New York Stock Exchange, and American Stock Exchange are SROs. The National Association of Securities Dealers, which operates the NASDAQ system, is also an SRO.
The Act also identifies and prohibits certain types of conduct in the markets and provides the Commission with disciplinary powers over regulated entities and persons associated with them.
The Act also empowers the SEC to require periodic reporting of information by companies with publicly traded securities.....
The full text of this Act can be read at:

Trust Indenture Act of 1939
This Act applies to debt securities such as bonds, debentures, and notes that are offered for public sale. Even though such securities may be registered under the Securities Act, they may not be offered for sale to the public unless a formal agreement between the issuer of bonds and the bondholder, known as the trust indenture, conforms to the standards of this Act.  The full text of this Act is available at:
Investment Company Act of 1940
This Act regulates the organization of companies, including mutual funds, that engage primarily in investing, reinvesting, and trading in securities, and whose own securities are offered to the investing public. The regulation is designed to minimize conflicts of interest that arise in these complex operations. The Act requires these companies to disclose their financial condition and investment policies to investors when stock is initially sold and, subsequently, on a regular basis. The focus of this Act is on disclosure to the investing public of information about the fund and its investment objectives, as well as on investment company structure and operations. It is important to remember that the Act does not permit the SEC to directly supervise the investment decisions or activities of these companies or judge the merits of their investments. The full text of this Act is available at:
Investment Advisers Act of 1940
This law regulates investment advisers. With certain exceptions, this Act requires that firms or sole practitioners compensated for advising others about securities investments must register with the SEC and conform to regulations designed to protect investors. Since the Act was amended in 1996, generally only advisers who have at least $25 million of assets under management or advise a registered investment company must register with the Commission.  The full text of this Act is available at:
Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002
On July 30, 2002, President Bush signed into law the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, which he characterized as "the most far reaching reforms of American business practices since the time of Franklin Delano Roosevelt." The Act mandated a number of reforms to enhance corporate responsibility, enhance financial disclosures and combat corporate and accounting fraud, and created the "Public Company Accounting Oversight Board," also known as the PCAOB, to oversee the activities of the auditing profession. The full text of the Act is available at: (Please check the Classification Tables maintained by the US House of Representatives Office of the Law Revision Counsel for updates to any of the laws.)  You can find links to all Commission rulemaking and reports issued under the Sarbanes-Oxley Act at:

posted on Mar, 29 2011 @ 01:11 PM
reply to post by crimvelvet

I worked for a very good corporation with great benefits. It had NO Debt. It owned its own land, factories and even their own power plant. Life insurance, pensions and even medical benefits were all company "owned" The company even loaned employees money for higher education for themselves and their families at a low rate. It was just the type of wealthy corporation the Raiders love. Now it has been riped apart, the land sold, the factory equipment packed up and shipped overseas (I know the guy who did the shipping) and thousands of employees are out of work. This is why Unions striking is NOT the solution to the problem. Low wages/unemployment is a symptom of a much bigger disease that simple corporate greed. It's BANKER GREED!

So this corporation is great and everything is going fantastic, why did they not continue? What made them let these corporate raiders take over? Could it have been the cost of doing business was to great? If they in fact owned everything why is it the greedy bankers fault?

posted on Mar, 29 2011 @ 05:58 PM
reply to post by habfan1968

So this corporation is great and everything is going fantastic, why did they not continue? What made them let these corporate raiders take over? Could it have been the cost of doing business was to great? If they in fact owned everything why is it the greedy bankers fault?

Bankers LOAN the money to the raiders so they can buy stock. The raiders buys enough stock to gain "leverage' and use that leverage to force a "proxy" battle. Once the raiders is in control of the board they are in the position where they can strip the company of any and all assets, pay off the loan and roll the money into a takeover of another target. The raiders often have no desire to run the business they are only interested in making a quick buck.

Many Many US companies were completely destroyed in this fashion.

Here is the long drawn out fight over control of Gillette. First Perelman (of Revlon) and the Coniston Partners managed to get enough Gillette stock so they could force a proxy fight for seats on the board of directors. The raiders promise the stockholders that if they gain control of the board they will pay super high dividends. The old board then has to make similar promises or they were likely to get the boot.

I remember that Mockler ended up promising to raise the dividends to something like 10% or more of the stock price. This ends up stripping the corporation of wealth that would have gone into R&D, improvements and salaries. In many cases the stockholders do not even vote the stock. Mutual funds like Fidelity do the actual voting for the stockholder. Monsanto for example is 85% owned by mutual funds/financial investors who vote the stock for the actual owners.

I should note here that one of the things Gillette had going for it was a long history of providing very good stock purchase options for its employees, many of whom had been at the company for years. I think this core group of people,who held a large block of stock, who were interested in the welfare of the company and NOT just the money, helped turn the tide in the first take over attempt.

There is a darn good reason for having the company 51 percent owned by the employees!
It sure beats having UNIONS.

At this point Gillette was wasting wealth on proxy battles, court fights and neglecting "business" It ended up with a partial closing of its plant in Andover MA during 1988?? or so.

Here are some of the headlines from the battle:


Talking Deals; Gillette Testing Standstill Pact

Revlon Asks to Bid For Gillette

Holders Fight Gillette Pact Shareholders of the Gillette Company are trying to block it from enforcing a 10-year standstill agreement with the Revlon Group, a court clerk said yesterday...

10 Parties in Standstill Deals With Gillette Are Disclosed

Battle Begins For Control Of Gillette

Rumors Swirling Around Gillette
....The latest example is the Gillette Company, the maker of Paper Mate pens, Right Guard deodorant and, of course, razor blades.

Since last Friday, when the stock stood at $29.25, Gillette has jumped $3.25, to $32.50, ahead only 25 cents yesterday.

In the same period nearly 7.4 million shares have moved out of the nation's biggest financial institutions and into the hands of what is believed to be one buyer, with no dickering over the price.

''This pattern smells like somebody's accumulating stock,'' one arbitrager remarked.....

Company News; Gillette Stock Up On Jacobs Rumors
....Nearly three million shares changed hands, making it the second-most-active issue. Traders speculated that Irwin L. Jacobs, the Minneapolis investor, was among the big buyers.

.... Analysts also speculated that Mr. Jacobs would soon announce his Gillette holdings to wage a proxy fight unless the company allowed Revlon to bid for it.

COMPANY NEWS; Perelman Says Quest For Gillette Isn't Over
Ronald O. Perelman, ...., said yesterday that he had not lost interest in acquiring Gillette,...

Mr. Perelman's statements, which were made in a speech to more than 1,000 people at Drexel Burnham Lambert's annual gathering, could help Coniston Partners, a dissident investor group that says it would press to sell the company if its wins four seats, including the one held by Gillette's chairman, Colman M. Mockler Jr., on Gillette's 12-member board in a shareholder vote next Thursday.

COMPANY NEWS; Gillette Alters Bylaws In Coniston Dispute

Vote Affirmed, Gillette Reports
The Gillette Company has amended its bylaws in an effort to limit the power of candidates backed by Coniston Partners in the event the nominees succeed in gaining seats on the board, the company said yesterday.

Gillette has been enmeshed in a proxy battle with Coniston, an investment partnership that is seeking four seats on the board of the consumer products company. If all of Coniston's nominees are elected to the board, Gillette would be left with only two directors who are also company executives and 10 outside directors, including Coniston.....

Gillette Rejects Revlon Bid
The Gillette Company said yesterday that its board had rejected Revlon Group Inc.'s unsolicited $5.41 billion takeover offer and reiterated its intention for the company to remain independent.

The curt, three-paragraph announcement came at the end of a special meeting of Gillette's directors, and was released after the stock market closed. Officials at Revlon were not available for comment late yesterday.

The rejection of the $47-a-share offer marks the third time that Gillette has spurned Revlon's chairman, Ronald O. Perelman. In November, Revlon dropped a $32.50-a-share, or $4.12 billion, bid after Gillette agreed to buy back Revlon's 13.9 percent stake in the company, giving Revlon a $34 million profit. In June, Revlon sweetened its bid, offering $40.50 a share, or $4.66 billion. That bid was also rebuffed by Gillette's board.

Mr. Perelman's third offer, which came in the form of a three-page letter to Gillette's chairman, Colman M. Mockler Jr., came despite a standstill agreement reached between Revlon and Gillette in November. As part of that agreement, Revlon agreed not to purchase Gillette stock or to seek control of the company for 10 years....

Mr. Perelman's latest bid also raised questions about other possible suitors. On Monday, USA Today's stock market columnist, Dan Dorfman, reported that two Minneapolis financiers, Irwin L. Jacobs and Carl R. Pohlad, might start a proxy fight or make a bid for Gillette.....

There appears to be little question that Gillette's board thinks that other takeover offers are likely, and that further defensive strategies will be expensive.....

Vote Affirmed, Gillette Reports
Coniston Partners, said yesterday that its independent inspector had confirmed that Gillette's four nominees to the board had defeated the dissident slate by 4 percent.

On Tuesday, Gillette disclosed that the preliminary report from the Certification Trust Company showed that Gillette had captured 52 percent of the votes cast while Coniston had won 48 percent....

The results are still not final, however, because both sides agreed before the election to delay certifying the results for seven days and because the outcome could change in light of pending litigation in Federal court in Boston, where a pretrial hearing is scheduled for May 31. Each side has charged the other with using false and misleading materials during the solicitation process.

THE MARKETS: Market Place; Gillette, long a favorite of investors, finds itself walking an edge as thin as one of its razor blades.

Proctor & Gamble finally acquired what was left of Gillette in January 27,2005

The takeover is expected to result in an estimated 5,000 job cuts from a combined workforce of 140,000....

posted on Mar, 29 2011 @ 09:41 PM
reply to post by crimvelvet

What are you a paid corporate troll ? Or can't you read ?
This thread is about UNIONS.
Nice job of hijacking my thread, go start your own thread punk.

posted on Mar, 30 2011 @ 10:02 AM
reply to post by OLD HIPPY DUDE

What are you a paid corporate troll ? Or can't you read ? This thread is about UNIONS.

What are UNIONS about???

They are about the collective bargaining power of the workers who have JOBS. IF the bankers are stripping the wealth from the businesses NO ONE gets a decent salary! Heck no one even gets a JOB!!!!

If Union workers do not wake-up they will accelerate the collapse of the USA. I was in a UNIONIZED plant and saw how management twisted the accounting records to make it look like the plant was losing money so they could close the plant while they opened a Non-union shop in Alabama.

The plant was NOT losing money actually we were one of the more profitable, but not when ALL the R&D expanses AND ALL the Corporate headquarters expenses were added in.

Massachusetts has very strict union busting laws and that is how the new management got rid of the Union. (The corporation was taken over and no it was not Gillette)

IF the Union lawyers had been doing their job they could have STOPPED the plant closure based on the "creative accounting" that was an open secret. They didn't even try. I lost two good buddies who died from the stress of that plant closing, both were in their forties.

IF UNIONS and union workers like you do not see what the real problem is then you can be manipulated into making the problem worse. That is what I see happening today.

MY only goal is to get the Diety Dammed leeches off the backs of American workers!!!! I HATE the BANKSTERS, I HATE the Corporate Cartels!

But if we do not Identify WHO those leeches are, the banker backed Corporate cartels, then we ALL end up without jobs in a sucked dry country of her wealth.

THIS is what I am trying to make you and other Union workers understand.

...You might be familiar with the mall-based, teen-focused, accessories chain, Claire’s Stores. It was taken over in 2007 by Apollo Management LP for $3.1 billion. At the time, the chain had over $245 million in cash on hand. Today, the cash is gone. Struggling under the weight of $2.3 billion in debt, sales continue to decline....

And our politicians, democrat and republican alike MADE IT HAPPEN!

posted on Mar, 30 2011 @ 10:53 AM
reply to post by OLD HIPPY DUDE

THIS is what I am so very very afraid of. The classic lets you and he fight that the elite are so fond of.

Are we being set up for a nasty clash between the conservatives and the Unions????

You have Idiots like Alex Jones and others, on the religious right, recommending buying guns and stocking up on Ammo. You have a faction who view government employees, with "good salaries" and "great benefits" as "stealing" the bread out of their children's mouths in the form of high taxes. They do not see the unions as representing them only as a group who is STEALING from them.

Remeber our education SUCKS (we are now second from the bottom ) and the cops have a bad name for corruption and cruelty too. So you are not getting much sympathy from the nonunion faction.

Now we have the Teamster Union organizing protests nationwide:

Take Action Near You
Union members all over the country will take action to reach out and educate their communities. Teamsters will be asked to take a pledge and to participate in local events...

April 8th Rally Call to Action

Lets just hope this isn't the “event” Security Secretary Janet Napolitano uses to clobber us with. I am very opposed to protests because they lend themselves to manipulation by TPTB. Agent Provocateur Cops showed at a 2007 Union protest in Canada.

SPP Agent Provocateur Cops Caught Red Handed Attempting To Incite Violence

Boots give away undercover cops as real protesters expose criminality

Peaceful protestors at the Security and Prosperity Partnership (SPP) summit in Montebello have captured sensational video of hired agent provocateurs attempting to incite rioting and turn the protest violent, only to encounter brave resistance from real protest leaders....

At least one of the masked men is holding a rock in his hand,...

The three are confronted by protest organizer Dave Coles, president of the Communications, Energy and Paperworkers Union of Canada. Coles makes it clear the masked men are not welcome among his group of protesters...

Proto's find shows Napolitano is looking for an excuse:

Washington (CNN) -- The terrorist threat to the U.S. homeland has continued to "evolve" and may now "be at its most heightened state" since the September 11, 2001, terror attacks, Homeland Security Secretary Janet Napolitano told members of Congress on Wednesday.

There is an increased reliance on recruiting Westerners into terrorist organizations, she told the House Homeland Security Committee. State and local law enforcement officers are increasingly needed to combat terror, and the focus must be on aiding law enforcement to help them secure communities, she said....

In other words let's forget the terrorists streaming in across our southern border and focus on removing even more freedom from the everyday America by calling him a possible “Homegrown Terrorist”

I do not like the fact they have everything set up from the Patriot Act and the John W. Warner Defense Authorization Act, and agreements to bring in Canadian troops, to actually practicing on US streets. Remember the Census takers getting the GPS coordinates of our houses....

Is Posse Comitatus Dead? US Troops on US Streets

In a barely noticed development, a US Army unit is now training for domestic operations under the control of US Army North, the Army service component of Northern Command. An initial news report in the Army Times newspaper last month noted that in addition to emergency response the force “may be called upon to help with civil unrest and crowd control.” The military has since claimed the force will not be used for civil unrest, but questions remain....

U.S. Northern Command, Canada Command establish new bilateral Civil Assistance Plan

February 14, 2008

SAN ANTONIO, Texas — U.S. Air Force Gen. Gene Renuart, commander of North American Aerospace Defense Command and U.S. Northern Command, and Canadian Air Force Lt.-Gen. Marc Dumais, commander of Canada Command, have signed a Civil Assistance Plan that allows the military from one nation to support the armed forces of the other nation during a civil emergency.

This document is a unique, bilateral military plan to align our respective national military plans to respond quickly to the other nation's requests for military support of civil authorities,” Renuart said...

Establishing martial law in the United States

The John W. Warner Defense Authorization Act of 2006 (PL 109-364),... was signed October 17, 2006, by President George W. Bush. The Act "has a provocative provision called 'Use of the Armed Forces in Major Public Emergencies'...

"But on closer inspection, its language also alters the two-centuries-old Insurrection Act, which Congress passed in 1807 to limit the president’s power to deploy troops within the United States ... 'to suppress, in a State, any insurrection, domestic violence, unlawful combination, or conspiracy'," Stein wrote.

"But the amended law takes the cuffs off" and "critics say it’s a formula for executive branch mischief," Stein wrote, as "the new language adds 'natural disaster, epidemic, or other serious public health emergency, terrorist attack or incident' to the list of conditions permitting the President to take over local authority — particularly 'if domestic violence has occurred to such an extent that the constituted authorities of the State or possession are incapable of maintaining public order.'"

"One of the few to complain, Sen. Patrick J. Leahy, D-Vt., warned that the measure virtually invites the White House to declare federal martial law. ... It 'subverts solid, longstanding posse comitatus statutes that limit the military’s involvement in law enforcement, thereby making it easier for the President to declare martial law,' he said in remarks submitted to the Congressional Record on Sept. 29."

edit on 30-3-2011 by crimvelvet because: fumble fingers

posted on Mar, 30 2011 @ 11:23 AM

Originally posted by Sestias
reply to post by OLD HIPPY DUDE

I live in a so-called "right to work" state in the south. "Right to work" in fact means unions are not recognized nor even tolerated very well.

The result? Wages here are about 20% lower than in union states and benefits are almost nil. My brother-in-law, a diesel mechanic, moved down here for awhile but high-tailed it back to Massachusetts when he realized they have much better wages, benefits and working conditions, thanks largely to unions. Mass. is also a much richer state per capita.

Yes, some big corporations have moved down here because of the tax breaks, the relaxed environmental laws, and the cheap labor. The result has been that my area of the state is still dirt poor, as it has always been.

Not to mention most of those companies are now offshoring their production to places where wages are even cheaper than here and there are no environmental regulations at all, so even our slave labor is losing their bowl of soup.

Soon we will all be working for third-world wages. That's how well we are all treated by employers without unions. With no clout or ability to organize or negotiate; we just have to accept what is dished out to us.

I wouldn't be surprised, though, if workers here were to begin to fight for the right to unionize. All the recent publicity has had a galvanizing effect.

edit on 28-3-2011 by Sestias because: polish

This is 100% truth about the jobs in the South.

The typical northerner or "Yankee" would do the same thing as your brother-in-law. Most would NEVER subject themselves to whoring out for the PITIFUL work conditions and wages in the South if they had the choice to go back up North to the employee-friendly, workers-rights, and Pro-Union-friendly states. I know FIRST HAND on this one all too well...

I have lived in the North East and in the South. Folks in the North ACTUALLY HAD LIVES AND EXTRA MONEY to spend whereas Southerners work WAAAAAY harder for WAAAAAY less of a life or pay and get NOWHERE.

I truly feel bad for them in the South as they have NO FIGHT or BACKBONE against being exploited. They also unfortunately have bought into the Anti-Union nonsense as they are fed to believe that Unions and workers rights are the freaking Devil there and they swallow it hook line and sinker!!

Just had to comment on your post and tell you that what you say is DEAD-ON true. I for one know this first hand for a FACT. Sadly its 100% truth.

Northerners looking for employment: STAY UP NORTH do NOT head South!!! You will be DISAPPOINTED coming down South for Employment. I know first hand. No lie.
edit on 30-3-2011 by pplrnuts because: (no reason given)

posted on Mar, 30 2011 @ 03:35 PM
reply to post by pplrnuts

Northerners looking for employment: STAY UP NORTH do NOT head South!!! You will be DISAPPOINTED coming down South for Employment. I know first hand. No lie.


My pay was higher and my cost of living a lot lower when I moved from Mass to NC

It may have to do with the particular skill set you are selling. One of the companies I worked for used the Hay Guide Chart I sat on the committee for a year.

posted on Sep, 12 2012 @ 11:32 AM
reply to post by neo96

Wrong wrong and wrong, as you said the unions had they're day when this country had money. Did it ever occur to anyone that the economy was strong when most people were in a union? Now why would that be? Maybe because the middle class were the ones in those unions making a higher wage to have more spending power,have a better life.

I said this at the time I lost my job at Ford, once the companys break the backs of the unions and get rid of people with decent paying jobs, who are they planning on having buy they're goods?If your struggling to keep a roof over your head your not going to piss off the money on that new foreign made T.V. now are you?It's the same with any items,instead your ONLY going to buy what you absolutely have to. Food,clothing,bills,gas,and the roof over your head are going to be about as far as you can stretch it.

You see it now daily,its keeping the economy down. People don't know if they will have a job tomorrow,they aren't spending anything they don't have to,keeping the economy depressed.

Unions have they're bad and good points,theres no doubt about that.But people need to separate the company lies from the truth. And I've worked more non-union jobs than union,and can honestly say that I've seen more lazy workers at the non-union places. They were someones relative or friend or whatever and got away with it.You can see it whether its union or non-union. There will ALWAYS be those people who exploit any system.

For my money....I'll take a union job anyday over non-union.Too bad the companies broke almost all the unions now so there aren't many left.

new topics

top topics

<< 1   >>

log in