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.


The Royal Bank of Scotland gave nearly a quarter of a million dollars to Senator Dodd

page: 1

log in


posted on Oct, 1 2008 @ 08:22 AM

The Royal Bank of Scotland gave nearly a quarter of a million dollars to Senator Dodd

Coincidentally, the Royal Bank of Scotland gave nearly a quarter of a million dollars to Senator Dodd, who is leading the bailout negotiations in the Senate.

Chris Dodd:

Top 5 Contributors, 2003-2008

Citigroup Inc - $314,694
SAC Capital Partners - $282,000
United Technologies - $263,400
Royal Bank of Scotland - $229,950
American International Group - $224,678
(visit the link for the full news article)

Related News Links:

posted on Oct, 1 2008 @ 08:22 AM
Ok, does U.S. tax dollars go outside the U.S.?

There's definately something here I don't understand.

I have an aquaintance I met on the train the other day, he let me know that this is true and is hurting Canada's economy.
He works for the minister of finance.

Can anyone expand on this here?

Seems like there are way too many neo-con players.
(visit the link for the full news article)

posted on Oct, 1 2008 @ 08:35 AM
Foriegn banks defintely have a roll in our this

posted on Oct, 1 2008 @ 09:03 AM
Dude un-cool...if these people want to give money related to a bailout then give it to those people who are losing their homes directly. I think this bail out should work like the stimulus package and directly to those who drive the economy not fat hats in DC or the creditors. Give it to the people who owe the money so they can pay and keep their homes.

posted on Oct, 1 2008 @ 09:08 AM
That's pretty twisted, I'm currently in a battle with the Royal Bank of Scotland to get nearly £2000 worth of bank charges they've taken off me in the last 18 months. In one month alone they took £360 for admin fees for returning 2 unpaid direct debits. It's no wonder some people struggle to get by.

It's no surprise they can afford to dish out money like that when they're helping themselves to the 'little peoples' money.

posted on Oct, 1 2008 @ 09:24 AM
reply to post by Jimbowsk

Piss'n on the little man is a basic element of financial planning didn't you know. Dude sorry to hear of your troubles that proves my point. Give the money to those who owe money not to those who own the debts and big hats in government who have money.

curiosity pokes at beelzabub "hey ask what that 2000 converts to in US Dollars, expose the hypocrisy more clearly"

[edit on 1-10-2008 by Beelzabub]

posted on Oct, 1 2008 @ 09:43 AM
Ok - you are onto the source now - here's how I know....

I have been engaged in debate on the blog site of Obama urging people to do their homework, not react to this fabricated credit crisis, asking the Senator to reconsider his position, etc. Well everything has been posted until I shared this information about Senator Dodd and suggested that Obama was selling out as well now.

This information appeared in the blog comments and two minutes later it was removed. They are not allowing people to connect the dots to the campaign funders. Why? Sorry Senator Obama....but you are now making your own bed. Until you came out in support of this scheme you had my vote. And now, that you are censoring the truth, you have shown yourself to be the exact opposite of change. I am so sad and sickened right now. I am going back to post this again....and again...and again...until they cancel me.

Edit: The information re-appeared. Someone must have complained...then the mods let the information through. Ok...a little faith is restored. Back to hammering on the populace....and the Senator to change his vote.

[edit on 1-10-2008 by DancedWithWolves]

posted on Oct, 1 2008 @ 09:54 AM
Obama is a hypocrite
He says McCain is pro-bush 90% of the time

Well now, Obama is pushing the bailout bill way more than McCain

Just forget the two-party system
vote 3rd party
this world is so corrupt

EDIT: I'm not an isolationist but I think this hurts sovereignty

[edit on 1-10-2008 by ModernAcademia]

posted on Oct, 1 2008 @ 10:20 AM
Read the full details before jumping to conclusions


The organizations themselves did not donate , rather the money came from the organization's PAC, its individual members or employees or owners, and those individuals' immediate families


The organizations listed as "Top Contributors" reached this list for one of two reasons: either they gave through a political action committee sponsored by the organization, or individuals connected with the organization contributed directly to the candidate.

Under federal law, all contributions over $200 must be itemized and the donor's occupation and employer must be requested and disclosed, if provided.

So that story is: someone who works for RBS donated some money to Senator Dodd's electoral campaign. Hardly Pulitzer Prize stuff.

posted on Oct, 1 2008 @ 10:26 AM
reply to post by Pinktip

That link provided some interesting information. Thank you. I followed a link on that page to read more about how foreign investors would benefit from the bailout plan. I couldn't believe it. Not only would this plan call for taxpayers to bail out U.S. banks, but also foreign banks.

Here's a partial transcript of what Rep. Brad Sherman said to Larry Kudlow from CNBC about how the Paulson proposal will bail out foreign investors:

Rep. Brad Sherman, D California:

Larry I am glad you have a few seconds to talk to someone who voted against this bill. I am not changing my mind. I want to thank my colleagues who stood up to the purveyors of panic and voted against a very bad bill and voted with 400 eminent economists including three Nobel laureates who wrote to us and said don't panic, don't act hastily, hold hearings, work carefully. The fact is Larry if you read this bill, even you would have voted against it.

It provides hundreds of billions of dollars of bailouts to foreign investors. It provides no real control of Paulson's power. There is a critique board but not really a board that can step in and change what he does. It's a $700 billion program run by a part-time temporary employee and there is no limit on million dollar a month salaries.

Larry Kudlow: Let me just ask you one question. I think you are referring to foreign banks headquartered in the United States. I do not see how foreign investors get bailed out. Rep. Brad Sherman: Larry you have to read the bill. It's very clear. The Bank of Shanghai can transfer all of its toxic assets to the Bank of Shanghai of Los Angeles which can then sell them the next day to the Treasury. I had a provision to say if it wasn't owned by an American entity even a subsidiary, but at least an entity in the US, the Treasury can't buy it. It was rejected.

The bill is very clear. Assets now held in China and London can be sold to US entities on Monday and then sold to the Treasury on Tuesday. Paulson has made it clear he will recommend a veto of any bill that contained a clear provision that said if Americans did not own the asset on September 20th that it can't be sold to the Treasury. Hundreds of billions of dollars are going to bail out foreign investors. They know it, they demanded it and the bill has been carefully written to make sure that can happen.

Here's the source link:

Knowing that foreign investors can be bailed out if this bailout bill passes, combined with the information that ModernAcademia provided that one of Dodd's top contributors is a foreign bank, that certainly makes me further question Dodd's motivations for trying to get this bailout bill passed.

[edit on 1-10-2008 by cornblossom]

posted on Oct, 1 2008 @ 10:30 AM
Why are you questioning neo-con involvement in this when it's Dodd who is in questions? Since when did Dodd become anything other than a Democrat?

How about Frank? How about all the other Democrats who took loads of money from Fannie and Freddie? I'm not saying that there are no republicans guilty in this, because it's not a strictly partisan effort.

However, if you go down the line of who warned who of what was going to happen if nothing was done. You will find time and time again republicans warning of impending doom and democrats telling them they were insane.

posted on Oct, 1 2008 @ 11:22 AM
reply to post by nyk537


The two party system is a scam.

Even Ron Paul was saying that many republicans and dems that voted NAY for the bailout bill voted YAY for that expensive and recent defense bill and other bills in the last 12 days or so that asked the FED to print over 25billion.

When will people learn?

Republicrats is a one-party system.

new topics

top topics


log in