Exposing what lies beneath the bodies of dead bankers and what lies ahead for us

Cuervo

doobydoll

Tindalos2013
reply to post by doobydoll

 

?how many gangs are operating in your hometown.

As far as I know? None.

Some of the 'cam shooters' are ordinary people with families who resent our tax money being spent on technology to spy on us but close down libraries and other community services. If our money bought the cams, then they are ours to destroy if we don't want them.

People are sick to the back teeth of not being listened to by authorities so now instead of being vocal or protesting, they are finding other ways to object and get what they want.

edit on 16-2-2014 by doobydoll because: (no reason given)

Too bad you guys can't find a way to confiscate the cameras, sell them, then build your own library. That would make world news and become a model for every town's populace.

I mean, it's cool that you guys are doing that (more than I'd have the guts to do, for sure) but it would be awesome if you also got what you wanted in addition to getting rid of what you don't.

It's mostly bored kids whom are responsible, but a few adults are doing it too. Whenever a local resident was a victim of street crime the police and authorities couldn't be arsed to check cams thoroughly or aggressively pursue crooks, but if your dog crapped on the pavement and you didn't pick it up, the cams followed you home and you were slapped with a fine! CCTV is of no benefit to anyone except authorities. If cctv benefitted us and not authorities (like they want us to think), they wouldn't exist.

I'm just happy that a few people are not only waking up and getting angry, but are actually physically doing something about it. Shooting up cctv cams might seem like small potatoes compared to a revolution, but the beginning of every avalanche is a tiny snowflake.

reply to post by FreeWillAnomaly


There no true liberals in Washington, or very, very few.

Liberals believe in the rights of the individuals, and pretty much everyone in DC is a died in the wool conservative who prefers institutional control of the individual. They might disagree about which institution should be in charge, but they definitely have to belief in the rights of the individual.

You would have to be a bigger fool to vote republican, as they are the ones who got rid of the rules that keep the bankers in check.

Once you figure this out, you could be on your way.

reply to post by poet1b


That is how I would put it, most Democrats today fit the role of conservative Republicans of 30 years ago, and most Republicans today have drifted so far past "conservatism" and into fascist territory - using the government to empower corporations, or demanding greater deregulation to allow such massive corporate entities to exist in the first place.

The "family value" issues both sides beat each other up over are a red-herring - marriage acts and such serve as a distraction when billionaire moguls want to pander to their base just for votes.

Fact that the banks get exposed as infiltrating the CIA and police department, having their own surveillance center setup right there in command HQ, just as a number of bank execs are being offed, in my opinion, deserves to be much bigger news. Where's the outrage?

Heads are exploding right now, but they'll be back once they come up with a game plan on how to squelch this story. Can we say, "Bill Clinton's Penis?"

F&S, keep shining the light Bro

poet1b
reply to post by FreeWillAnomaly

 

There no true liberals in Washington, or very, very few.

Liberals believe in the rights of the individuals, and pretty much everyone in DC is a died in the wool conservative who prefers institutional control of the individual. They might disagree about which institution should be in charge, but they definitely have to belief in the rights of the individual.

You would have to be a bigger fool to vote republican, as they are the ones who got rid of the rules that keep the bankers in check.

Once you figure this out, you could be on your way.

edit on 16-2-2014 by poet1b because: add second to last line.

Well you're only half right about the banking regulations. The other half was Bill Clinton, still the poster boy for the Democrats, and members of his cabinet that pushed for it and he brokered the deal with the Republican led Congress. The whole Monica Lewinsky farce was a diversion for many things and this was among them.

What a load of horse crap.

WHAT A LOAD!.

Repeal of Glass-Steagall Caused the Financial Crisis

Want to blame someone ?

Blame Clinton for ending Glass Stegall.

Then blame these guys for going nothing to see here folks move right along:





Want to blame someone ?

Trying blaming US politicians who have been there for decades.

Who 'regulate' bankers, and who created Fanny and Freddy, and who created Mortgage backed securities,.

FEDERALLY BACKED.

This thread can't get anymore 'partisan'.

reply to post by neo96


Thanks for bringing up the Glass-Steagal act. The act prevented the overlap of banking, insurance, and securities. But it was the Republicans who wrote the act killing the Glass-Steagal act. That would be the Gramm–Leach–Bliley Act.

[The Gramm–Leach–Bliley Act] repealed part of the Glass–Steagall Act of 1933, removing barriers in the market among banking companies, securities companies and insurance companies that prohibited any one institution from acting as any combination of an investment bank, a commercial bank, and an insurance company. With the passage of the Gramm–Leach–Bliley Act, commercial banks, investment banks, securities firms, and insurance companies were allowed to consolidate.

The authors are: Sen. Phil Gramm (R, Texas), Rep. Jim Leach (R, Iowa), and Rep. Thomas J. Bliley, Jr. (R, Virginia).

It directly paved the way for the creation of "too big to fail" behemoths like AIG, and the corrupt practice of "securitizing" debt held by banks.

Now, let us also recall the atmosphere in Congress in the mid 90's - then, like now, Republicans were holding the government hostage. They forced a government shutdown in 95-96. They were holding a kangaroo court over impeachment. They FORCED through all their acts that removed regulations of financial institutions.

Blame Dems for not stopping it, blame dems for going along in some cases, but don't blame dems for being the root cause of it, Republicans hold exclusive domain over that title.

reply to post by Blackmarketeer

Thanks for bringing up the Glass-Steagal act. The act prevented the overlap of banking, insurance, and securities. But it was the Republicans who wrote the act killing the Glass-Steagal act. That would be the Gramm–Leach–Bliley Act.

What a crock, and pay no attention to the guy who signed it in to law ?

Right ?

That was Bill Clinton.

reply to post by neo96


Ah of course, let's remove all blame from the 104th Congress, the "Republican Revolution" that passed Bills stripping away regulations to prevent just what followed - financial collapse, so long as we can smugly blame it on Clinton. Let's also forget about the TWO government shutdowns, one in 95 and one again in 96, that forced his hand.

Tha banksters ran the 104th Congress, and the banksters got their deregulations passed. It was a "Conservative Agenda" in 1996, and it got the Gramm–Leach–Bliley Act pushed through.


Here, let me post a little reminder of what REAL Republicans once looked like:



Does this sound like your Republican party today - nope. Just the opposite. The Republicans today are Corporatists, pushing the agenda of the 1%, and attacking any type of regulations designed to PREVENT collapses, such as the financial crisis of 2008. Even now, these same Corporatists are attacking the only act (Dodd-Frank) weakening it to the point that it can no longer have any hope of preventing the next banking crisis.

Let's play a little game - I will write a post blaming Clinton for signing the Gramm–Leach–Bliley Act into law.

YOU can write a post blaming the three Republicans who wrote the bill into existence in the first place.

reply to post by Blackmarketeer

Ah of course, let's remove all blame from the 104th Congress,

Works for me then by that 'logic' lot of people owe GWB an apology for the Patriot Act.

He didn't 'write' it after all.

And please don't tell me what a 'real republican' looks like.

reply to post by Blackmarketeer


But is anyone going to the party is the real question that needs to be asked here.

Blackmarketeer
reply to post by neo96

 

Ah of course, let's remove all blame from the 104th Congress, the "Republican Revolution" that passed Bills stripping away regulations to prevent just what followed - financial collapse, so long as we can smugly blame it on Clinton. Let's also forget about the TWO government shutdowns, one in 95 and one again in 96, that forced his hand.

Tha banksters ran the 104th Congress, and the banksters got their deregulations passed. It was a "Conservative Agenda" in 1996, and it got the Gramm–Leach–Bliley Act pushed through.


Here, let me post a little reminder of what REAL Republicans once looked like:

Does this sound like your Republican party today - nope. Just the opposite. The Republicans today are Corporatists, pushing the agenda of the 1%, and attacking any type of regulations designed to PREVENT collapses, such as the financial crisis of 2008. Even now, these same Corporatists are attacking the only act (Dodd-Frank) weakening it to the point that it can no longer have any hope of preventing the next banking crisis.

Let's play a little game - I will write a post blaming Clinton for signing the Gramm–Leach–Bliley Act into law.

YOU can write a post blaming the three Republicans who wrote the bill into existence in the first place.

republicans today are the democrats of yesteryear. democrats today are the republicans of yesteryear. it all changed around in the mid 60's. back in the 1950's deep south democrats were called dixiecrats. they all bailed on the democrats when they pushed civil rights. dixiecrats and todays republicans push racial politics and work for the elite wealthy.

say the two sides are the same all you want, but republicans from the time of reagan have been working hardest to rob from the poor and give to the wealthy.

it still has to be asked, getting back to the op, why jp morgan has to have their own setup to spy on manhattan, paid for by taxpayers? they bribed their way to get this. to go after whistleblowers? kill any of their own who looked ready to fold and talk?

One must look back far enough to understand the enormity of the lie and the criminality of bankers and governments alike. We must understand the legal restraints that were severed during the Clinton years and the congress that changed the rules regarding financial institutions. We must understand that the criminal acts were bold and bipartisan, and were designed to consolidate wealth through the destruction of the middle class. All of this is part of a much larger plan to establish a one world economy by “killing” the U.S. dollar and consequently, eradicating the middle class by a cabal of globalists that existed and continue to exist within all sectors of our government. The results will be crippling to not just the United States, but the entire Western world.

truth. changed the rules regarding finance institutes, by the repubs. sorry neo you can't cover that up.

Does this sound like your Republican party today - nope. Just the opposite. The Republicans today are Corporatists, pushing the agenda of the 1%, and attacking any type of regulations designed to PREVENT collapses, such as the financial crisis of 2008

Actually the Democratic party are corporatists. How about checking out how much JP Morgan makes off of food stamps.

The Democratic motto has been robbing from the rich given to the so called poor for over 70 years so they can have more stuff.

MOD REMINDER.....

Plenty of blame to go around.......

Please debate the topic without partisan bickering.
It will derail the OP.

reply to post by neo96

Works for me then by that 'logic' lot of people owe GWB an apology for the Patriot Act.

He didn't 'write' it after all.

You love tossing around non-sequiturs don't you?

The Patriot Act was written by Frank J. Sensenbrenner, Jr. (R–WI). A Republican. One of the first, and crucial, steps to creating the current surveillance state we now have - which, apparently, JP Morgan is abusing with this JPMorgan-CIA-NYPD spy deal.

Bush's regime would go on to create 1,200 spy agencies in the US. 1,200 intelligence gathering agencies. Mull that around. Maybe it's not so surprising that we have banksters spying on Manhattan as part of that apparatus.

reply to post by DontTreadOnMe


Fair enough. Back to the OP:

There is proof of this that exists. The New York Civil Liberties Union (NYCLU) has documented the increasingly extensive surveillance being conducted in lower Manhattan and throughout the city. They have verified that not only are our constitutional rights being violated every minute of every day, but the fruits of surveillance by police and corporate entities are shared between the police, the intelligence agencies and private financial institutions, without restraint on the distribution on such findings.

Are you engaged in a protesting against the criminality of the one-percent? Well, they one-percent are watching you, and they are literally seated right next to the police. Are you a journalist following up on possible “bankster” corruption by meeting a potential whistleblower? You better understand that the bankster target of your investigation is watching you, in real-time, with the complete approval and cooperation of the police. As documented by the NYCLU, you are likely now “on file,” and all data compiled is maintained and accessible not just to law enforcement, but to the very target of your investigation—in real time.

Such surveillance and integration between big banks, law enforcement and spy agencies is not just limited to lower Manhattan or even the United States. It is also most prevalent in London and other cities where international banking is conducted.

This is precisely why I call the existing state of affairs regarding the NSA and surveillance in the US a "total information awareness" network designed not to serve just anti-terror needs but to serve the needs of the Corporate elite. Sitting at the top of that heap are the big Wall Street Banks.

The same banks that are now seeing a high-rate of highly suspicious deaths of their own members. It is "house-cleaning" time, methinks.

Blackmarketeer
reply to post by neo96

 

Thanks for bringing up the Glass-Steagal act. The act prevented the overlap of banking, insurance, and securities. But it was the Republicans who wrote the act killing the Glass-Steagal act. That would be the Gramm–Leach–Bliley Act.

[The Gramm–Leach–Bliley Act] repealed part of the Glass–Steagall Act of 1933, removing barriers in the market among banking companies, securities companies and insurance companies that prohibited any one institution from acting as any combination of an investment bank, a commercial bank, and an insurance company. With the passage of the Gramm–Leach–Bliley Act, commercial banks, investment banks, securities firms, and insurance companies were allowed to consolidate.

The authors are: Sen. Phil Gramm (R, Texas), Rep. Jim Leach (R, Iowa), and Rep. Thomas J. Bliley, Jr. (R, Virginia).

It directly paved the way for the creation of "too big to fail" behemoths like AIG, and the corrupt practice of "securitizing" debt held by banks.

Now, let us also recall the atmosphere in Congress in the mid 90's - then, like now, Republicans were holding the government hostage. They forced a government shutdown in 95-96. They were holding a kangaroo court over impeachment. They FORCED through all their acts that removed regulations of financial institutions.

Blame Dems for not stopping it, blame dems for going along in some cases, but don't blame dems for being the root cause of it, Republicans hold exclusive domain over that title.

edit on 16-2-2014 by Blackmarketeer because: (no reason given)

It's obvious you bought the TV version of events. The reality is, all of Washington, no let me rephrase that, all of those who wielded power in Washington, were in on it. The Lewinsky crap was a diversion for the idiots. You think Clinton, either one, take your pick, cared about public perception at that point in time after he was re-elected? You think he cared about censure? Hell no. He cared about getting filthy rich and still maintaining control of the party, which he does until this day.

Hillary and Bubba are in a business partnership and they freely admit that. They have no shame and they also have the press to make it all good for them. Ah but it's all just a ruse. The Bush family is pulling the strings. Look how the old man and Bubba get along. You'd think they'd hate one another. Same goes for them with Obama. Heck they put Obama in office and don't think otherwise. The dirty work needed to be done after Dubya left office - well more dirty work and they got a black guy to do it. Why? So anyone who questioned him would be branded a racist. It was easy to do too because the libs were all over it, carrying his flag just as the Cons were for Dubya.

This whole thing, what ever they have planned, needs to be wrapped up soon. Old man Bush wants to see the fruits of his labor come to fruition before that body he's occupying is stiff as a board and six feet under. The people are getting restless and they know it. They don't fear it, but it could complicate things. The full court press is on and no one from your party is going to save us and neither is anyone from the Cons side. You can see the evil live on TV every day. Look at McCain and Pelosi. You can almost see their heads spin a 360.

So keep carrying that torch. It will soon feel like an anvil.