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.
What was revealed in the audit was startling: $16,000,000,000,000.00 had been secretly given out to US banks and corporations and foreign banks everywhere from France to Scotland. From the period between December 2007 and June 2010, the Federal Reserve had secretly bailed out many of the world’s banks, corporations, and governments.. The Federal Reserve likes to refer to these secret bailouts as an all-inclusive loan program, but virtually none of the money has been returned and it was loaned out at 0% interest. Why the Federal Reserve had never been public about this or even informed the United States Congress about the $16 trillion dollar bailout is obvious — the American public would have been outraged to find out that the Federal Reserve bailed out foreign banks while Americans were struggling to find jobs.
To place $16 trillion into perspective, remember that GDP of the United States is only $14.12 trillion. The entire national debt of the United States government spanning its 200+ year history is “only” $14.5 trillion. The budget that is being debated so heavily in Congress and the Senate is “only” $3.5 trillion. Take all of the outrage and debate over the $1.5 trillion deficit into consideration, and swallow this Red pill: There was no debate about whether $16,000,000,000,000 would be given to failing banks and failing corporations around the world.
In late 2008, the TARP Bailout bill was passed and loans of $800 billion were given to failing banks and companies. That was a blatant lie considering the fact that Goldman Sachs alone received 814 billion dollars. As is turns out, the Federal Reserve donated $2.5 trillion to Citigroup, while Morgan Stanley received $2.04 trillion. The Royal Bank of Scotland and Deutsche Bank, a German bank, split about a trillion and numerous other banks received hefty chunks of the $16 trillion.
Originally posted by Watts
Originally posted by GeorgiaGirl
Originally posted by Watts
Originally posted by macman
Originally posted by Watts
reply to post by shug7272
I think its partly because he's "black"... I don't think that's undeniable, the whole "the economy is bad and there's a black guy in office so it must be totally his fault" ideal is in full effect,
[atsimg]http://files.abovetopsecret.com/images/member/ea2623fcd6b8.jpg[/atsimg]
Soooo the hinting by republicans that he is a covert muslim spy, a pseudo-nazi, non-american etc etc etc into infinity isn't considered racist nowadays? I must have missed that change. For Christs sakes, people held signs that read "NO MONKEYS IN THE WHITE HOUSE" in protest not even a month after his election. Get your head out your ass, the racism is blatant. Is it the sum total of the problems? No, but his race is a factor even if you dumbly refuse to admit the obvious. Lol the nerve of you to facepalm....
Google "Bush monkey picture" and check the images you get. So it's okay to make fun of a white man, and compare him to a monkey?
Your words not mine. Are you arguing the fact that "monkey" was among the racially charged words used pre-civil rights era? Lol. Why pretend like I'm pulling things out of thin air? There's been a tone of racism from the start, its not a hinted thing, its obvious and out in the open. To call a black man a monkey has a totally different connotation from calling a white man a monkey, they're both negative but the connotation is different. Call a black person a n***er then call a white man the same word, I bet you get totally different reactions even though the word originally meant "ignorant".
Stop playing stupid here. Racism is alive and well.
place all that on bush? the republicans? uhn uhn aint going to happen
Originally posted by macman
To be honest, I have lived in GA. Yes, downtown Atlanta is predominantly Black. So what.
He was elected solely on the premise of being the first Black President.
But, I hate to squash your outlook, it is wrong.
No, people as a whole do not dislike him due to his color. He is disliked based on his merits and actions.
And no, he is not a good man, as he is dragging our country down the toilet to fulfill his own ideological views.
Intelligent? Based on what? Getting a piece of paper from a College?
He is disliked by many, but not based on his color.
Originally posted by Watts
reply to post by shug7272
I think its partly because he's "black"... I don't think that's undeniable, the whole "the economy is bad and there's a black guy in office so it must be totally his fault" ideal is in full effect, but I think its also because he didn't bring an abrupt end to the blatant greed-motivated system in place now among the major corporations which really control the country. He gave them a stern talking-to and nothing more, basically letting business continue as usual. There should be a policing agency of some sort specifically aimed at corporations to stop the corrupt practices eating away at our country like rust on a pipeline.
Honestly, they need to cut the bs and legalize marijuana. The war on that plant is beyond stupid. There's millions of people in prison, costing the US billions, for smoking a naturally growing plant that is no more dangerous than tobacco or alcohol... in fact less dangerous. And more billions are spent trying to enforce the stupid laws that criminalize a plant. Just think about it, "nature is against the law"...a plant that existed before humans even knew what it was is "illegal". Prohibition made more sense than the war on marijuana.
Our country is burning itself with so many ass-backwards laws and regulations like this. There's a total lack of common sense in policy creation and the current economic situation is just one of the major side effects of this. Stupid ideas can only create stupid outcomes.
Originally posted by Fitch303s
Listen, I don't like black people in general but me disliking the president has EVERYTHING to do with him being a liberal whether black or white I DO NOT want liberals running this country. Stop playing the f0c1ng race card already.
Originally posted by DIDtm
reply to post by OuttaTime
I wish to God, I didnt see your post.
I havent seen much news in the past couple of days due to work..but has the media picked this up at all?
Originally posted by neo96
i dont agree ever since 2006 when the democrates took over in the house and controlled it from 2006 to 2010 and controlled the senate from 2006 to present.
pretty hard to just blame bush when the democrats held the purse strings and controlled legislation.
all i hear now is about how obstructionist the republicans are seems to me all that supposed power they have now that would have meant
that the democrats could have stepped in and done something from 2006 to present but wait they didnt
and in my opinion whats going wrong with this country is on the democrats and only them.
and that stimulus bailed out unions and lawyers and did nothing that it was sold as.
obama and the democrats have the majority of the blame here and thats why they offer no real solutions
and i am not saying the republicans are any better than just a tad bit.edit on 29-7-2011 by neo96 because: (no reason given)