MAPS DON'T LIE, BUT GOVERNMENTS DO
Sometimes you have to wonder if typical Americans ever look at maps. Because so often when we are told something by our government or read about it in the mainstream press, we simply conclude that the information was factually presented to us. But familiarity with a map of the Middle East, for example, might get a person questioning things a little bit. It could trigger the utilization of a little common sense based on geography and the precise location of certain countries relative to others. Common sense is one of the great weapons of the citizenry. It harkens back to the classic: "who are you gonna believe, me or your lying eyes".
Use of maps gives a background from which we can formulate our own, singular reasoned judgment concerning events in far away countries. The location of nations in the Middle East and North Africa reveal much about our policies and actions regarding Israel, Egypt, Syria, Iraq, Afghanistan, Saudi Arabia, and others. A truly reflective examination also reveals the very close proximity of some of them to Russia and should spur some thoughts about American activities and how they are explained. To include, quite obviously, how Russia is portrayed.
Try a neat little experiment and see what you come up with. First, take a few minutes to gather your thoughts about events in the last few years in the Middle East and North Africa. Then recall Gen. Wesley Clark's 2007 remarks about our country's plans for Iraq, Libya, Syria, Lebanon, Somalia, Sudan, and Yemen. Then study a map of the full region. Then employ some common sense. I bet what you come up with might well not jibe all that well with what we've been told by our government and mainstream press.
- Birney K. Brown
Tuesday, September 25, 2018
Tuesday, September 18, 2018
RUMINATIONS ON THE FINANCIAL CRISIS TEN YEARS LATER
In one of the greatest examples of the financial industry's control over governmental functions, I remain awestruck by the scheme Wall Street was able to pull off during the beginning of the Obama administration (and actually throughout his eight years).
The Democrats had control of both the House and Senate from January of 2009 until the mid term results in November of 2010 when they lost the House. This was the time when the Obama administration Department of Justice under Eric Holder should have begun aggressively pursuing criminal charges against Wall Street executives. Everyone in Washington, D.C. knew there was pervasive fraud throughout the financial industry. They knew that unquenchable greed driven by Wall Street's engine had infiltrated just about every entity whose goals had anything to do with money. They knew that Main Street was getting unmercifully crushed and who was responsible for it.
So what did Wall Street do in such an environment to protect itself? Well, they somehow cajoled the Obama administration into focusing all its attention on the Affordable Healthcare Act. When they realized how important the passing of Obamacare was to the administration, Wall Street unleashed all its power handlers and other minions to make sure that Obamacare became issue #1 garnering all the media attention and legislative coverage possible. And to keep it in the headlines above all else to include dutifully covering all its endless controversies. ( No wonder the Occupy Wall Street movement was so short lived - ensuring that the ACA remained the foremost issue on everyone's minds efficiently killed off any impetus for financial change).
The Obama administration was played like a fiddle until the mid terms of 2010 when House democrats were unseated everywhere you looked. And so much of the reason for this legislative conversion was the complete and utter failure of Obama to hold Wall Street accountable for its actions. It gave birth to the Tea Party and ultimately the Trump phenomenon. It also coincides with when the democratic party subtly began to lose touch with many of the issues truly important to the typical voter.
I find it ironic and naive that so many defend Mr. Obama by saying stuff like "Congress and the Republicans blocked so much that he tried to do". Well - why the heck did he not do anything whatsoever about the financial criminals when he was in control of Congress for two full years? As earlier stated, it's because he was completely "gamed" by Wall Street who recognized and took full advantage of his obsession with healthcare. They seized upon this myopic obsession in ways only they could to ensure that Obama left the handling and resolution of the financial crisis in the hands of those who had actually created it. Namely Ben Bernanke, the NY Fed, and federal agencies like the Treasury filled to the brim with Wall Street veterans. Such people are not prone to implementing any substantive changes not protective of Wall Street or that would not serve the long term interests of the financial industry.
For those like myself who believe that Wall Street does have a vice-like grip on government, the pathetic response to out-and-out obvious fraud, deceit, theft, dishonesty, and wholesale criminality on the part of white collar banking executives at the highest levels is mind bending. But I also believe it was orchestrated. Politicians tend to turn over financial or heady economic matters to others as they are believed to be very complicated and therefore in need of great expertise. The type of expertise which might lead a healthcare agenda-driven president to perhaps be convinced to pick an Attorney General who has made a career out of litigation in the financial arena. (actually by defending white collar financial criminals as a partner in Wall Street's "first call" firm). This outfit, Covington and Burling - even held his corner office open for his impending return after he apparently felt he had accomplished his "goals" in public service. Mr. Holder was then able to just settle back in. Leaving behind a legacy of puny administrative fines relative to the humongous bank gains through the conduct involved, the cementing of a realization that the continuation of the behavior is therefore profitable, and the standard use of the estimable "without admitting or denying guilt" settlement language.
To top this infuriating rumination off, these same above parties were able to successfully direct the media and our leaders to pronounce that returning the banking system to health was vital for the health of Main Street. Now there's some true "healthcare" concern for you.
- Birney K. Brown
In one of the greatest examples of the financial industry's control over governmental functions, I remain awestruck by the scheme Wall Street was able to pull off during the beginning of the Obama administration (and actually throughout his eight years).
The Democrats had control of both the House and Senate from January of 2009 until the mid term results in November of 2010 when they lost the House. This was the time when the Obama administration Department of Justice under Eric Holder should have begun aggressively pursuing criminal charges against Wall Street executives. Everyone in Washington, D.C. knew there was pervasive fraud throughout the financial industry. They knew that unquenchable greed driven by Wall Street's engine had infiltrated just about every entity whose goals had anything to do with money. They knew that Main Street was getting unmercifully crushed and who was responsible for it.
So what did Wall Street do in such an environment to protect itself? Well, they somehow cajoled the Obama administration into focusing all its attention on the Affordable Healthcare Act. When they realized how important the passing of Obamacare was to the administration, Wall Street unleashed all its power handlers and other minions to make sure that Obamacare became issue #1 garnering all the media attention and legislative coverage possible. And to keep it in the headlines above all else to include dutifully covering all its endless controversies. ( No wonder the Occupy Wall Street movement was so short lived - ensuring that the ACA remained the foremost issue on everyone's minds efficiently killed off any impetus for financial change).
The Obama administration was played like a fiddle until the mid terms of 2010 when House democrats were unseated everywhere you looked. And so much of the reason for this legislative conversion was the complete and utter failure of Obama to hold Wall Street accountable for its actions. It gave birth to the Tea Party and ultimately the Trump phenomenon. It also coincides with when the democratic party subtly began to lose touch with many of the issues truly important to the typical voter.
I find it ironic and naive that so many defend Mr. Obama by saying stuff like "Congress and the Republicans blocked so much that he tried to do". Well - why the heck did he not do anything whatsoever about the financial criminals when he was in control of Congress for two full years? As earlier stated, it's because he was completely "gamed" by Wall Street who recognized and took full advantage of his obsession with healthcare. They seized upon this myopic obsession in ways only they could to ensure that Obama left the handling and resolution of the financial crisis in the hands of those who had actually created it. Namely Ben Bernanke, the NY Fed, and federal agencies like the Treasury filled to the brim with Wall Street veterans. Such people are not prone to implementing any substantive changes not protective of Wall Street or that would not serve the long term interests of the financial industry.
For those like myself who believe that Wall Street does have a vice-like grip on government, the pathetic response to out-and-out obvious fraud, deceit, theft, dishonesty, and wholesale criminality on the part of white collar banking executives at the highest levels is mind bending. But I also believe it was orchestrated. Politicians tend to turn over financial or heady economic matters to others as they are believed to be very complicated and therefore in need of great expertise. The type of expertise which might lead a healthcare agenda-driven president to perhaps be convinced to pick an Attorney General who has made a career out of litigation in the financial arena. (actually by defending white collar financial criminals as a partner in Wall Street's "first call" firm). This outfit, Covington and Burling - even held his corner office open for his impending return after he apparently felt he had accomplished his "goals" in public service. Mr. Holder was then able to just settle back in. Leaving behind a legacy of puny administrative fines relative to the humongous bank gains through the conduct involved, the cementing of a realization that the continuation of the behavior is therefore profitable, and the standard use of the estimable "without admitting or denying guilt" settlement language.
To top this infuriating rumination off, these same above parties were able to successfully direct the media and our leaders to pronounce that returning the banking system to health was vital for the health of Main Street. Now there's some true "healthcare" concern for you.
- Birney K. Brown
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)