The Inside Job

[HankQuinlan]

Finally had my chance to see this documentary, released on dvd the past week. Do not watch it if you don't like being made angry; do watch it if you want to actually understand the massive scale of the robbery that took place (and which is still going on).

It is brilliant at explaining the methods used, and how they got away with it. The entertaining aspect is how the filmmaker/off-camera interviewer uses Columbo-like methods to expose those arrogant enough to agree to appear in front of their cameras, and their look of alarm when they realize that this is not another fluff-news piece but someone who has done the research.

One aspect that I had not understood was the complicity of the academic world. If I had been a newsperson, or a government official, who would I have relied on to understand what was happening? Wall Street promoters? No. Harvard Business School or Columbia University profs? Very likely. Would I have understood that they too were complicit in and profitting from the deregulation? Likely not.

Why are these bastards still in power, both in the corporate world and in Washington? Why is there no legal prosecution of the greatest financial criminals in history?

If I was king of the world, there would be heads on pikes from one end of Wall Street to the other.

 

[threepeat]

Why is there no legal prosecution of the greatest financial criminals in history?

I've spent some time thinking this same question, and the only thing that comes to mind is that they are either: (1) vastly incompetent, (2) powerless to affect any meaningful change, or (3) they are in on it too. I suspect it is all three to varying degrees.

 

[Aleister Crowley]

Its called GREED.

 

[rexxx]

The fact that this film came out and nothing has changed just shows how much they have control over everything

 

[maroonedsailor]

Thanks Hank - It's playing this week at the Empire on Granville @ 6 and 8:30 Anyone else want to go see it with me? I'll probably go to the 6 pm one as my last ferry home is 9:15

Finally had my chance to see this documentary, released on dvd the past week. Do not watch it if you don't like being made angry; do watch it if you want to actually understand the massive scale of the robbery that took place (and which is still going on).

It is brilliant at explaining the methods used, and how they got away with it. The entertaining aspect is how the filmmaker/off-camera interviewer uses Columbo-like methods to expose those arrogant enough to agree to appear in front of their cameras, and their look of alarm when they realize that this is not another fluff-news piece but someone who has done the research.

One aspect that I had not understood was the complicity of the academic world. If I had been a newsperson, or a government official, who would I have relied on to understand what was happening? Wall Street promoters? No. Harvard Business School or Columbia University profs? Very likely. Would I have understood that they too were complicit in and profitting from the deregulation? Likely not.

Why are these bastards still in power, both in the corporate world and in Washington? Why is there no legal prosecution of the greatest financial criminals in history?

If I was king of the world, there would be heads on pikes from one end of Wall Street to the other.

 

[InTheBum]

[video]http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/warning/view/?utm_campaign=viewpage&utm_medium=grid&utm_source=grid[/video]


Brooksley Born tried to warn everyone...and she was shut down...a must see video!

 

[badbadboy]

Why are these bastards still in power, both in the corporate world and in Washington? Why is there no legal prosecution of the greatest financial criminals in history?

If I was king of the world, there would be heads on pikes from one end of Wall Street to the other.

The answer was presented to you in the video. It is because they either came from Wall Street or went to Wall Street via Washington DC. DC does not prosecute "it's own".

Case in point: Scooter Libby should have been convicted of treason because he gave up the name of a CIA asset in the Persian Gulf. What did he end up getting? House arrest. If that had been an FBI or CIA agent they would be serving Life in Prison.

The same director also did "No end in Sight" a bleak synopsis of the Iraq war how the Bush Administration concocted the reasons to go to war with Iraq and how they have the mess on their hands for the next 10 years trying to fix their own mistakes.

 

[Miss*Bijou]

I just downloaded it.. and will be watching it this week. Looking forward to it.
(Right now, I'm watching End:Civ - Resist or Die, which is pretty good btw!).


Here is the trailer for the Inside Job:
(fyi you can watch or download the full movie here)

...and what the hell... here's a clip for End:Civ - Resist or Die :
(fyi you can watch the full movie here)

 

[HankQuinlan]

[video]http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/warning/view/?utm_campaign=viewpage&utm_medium=grid&utm_source=grid[/video]


Brooksley Born tried to warn everyone...and she was shut down...a must see video!

Thanks. She was interviewed in The Inside Job as well. I will watch that -- Frontline is one of the few sources of decent docs on US tv.

 

[Miss*Bijou]

Why Isn't Wall Street in Jail?
By Matt Taibbi

Financial crooks brought down the world's economy — but the feds are doing more to protect them than to prosecute them

>LINK<

 

[HankQuinlan]

Just read the Rolling Stone article Miss Bijou linked to. Basically, it all means "democracy" means fuck all. When corporations control all the facets of the state, including the justice system, the society is doomed. If there is no willingness by the public to do anything about it, then we deserve nothing more. And, obviously, "exercising your vote" is meaningless when both alternatives are controlled by the same greedy fucks. Depressing.

Maybe we aren't so far removed from Libya or China after all. Sure we have free speech -- these docs and Rolling Stone magazine prove it. But if it doesn't mean anything, and they can just sneer and say "So fucking what? What are you going to do about it?" and resume the same criminal endeavours, what is next?

 

[Miss*Bijou]

We do better in Canada because we have an election expenses reporting law that has teeth - ask any Conservative how sharp those teeth are. In Canada, it costs a maximum of 80 thousand to elect an MP, that's all you can spend. That's why our politicians are more honest than American politicians, that's why Canada isn't deep in shit like the Americans are and that's why the Canadian dollar is worth more than an American dollar.

That may be, but we're completely immune either. Nor are our politicians more honest. Give us another 40 years and the way things are going, we'll be much more like the US - albeit on a much smaller scale.


Hank, no I don't think democracy means much, or that we live in one, for that matter. I think most people believe we do and this is why we don't react and fight back even when we witness the most outrageous abuses of power and injustices. There is a long list of other assaults on democracy that no one is reacting to or reacted to because of this conviction that we are safe since we do afterall live in a democracy. As long as we believe that and we feel secure that everything is A-ok, those in power will be get away with all kinds of abuse. They won't be bothered to make decisions with our interests in mind but will rather reward themselves and those who offer the most money! And just as it is done now, people will see the corruption and continue to respond with apathy. The thing to realize is that you can't view this specific issue we're discussing as new, unique or unusual. The problem is in lots of different places, only you don't feel personally affected or identify with those who claim to be, so you don't take much notice or give it too much thought.


What makes this particular one impossible to dismiss is the amount of people affected, the fact that they are ordinary people and families most can identify with, the fact that we can see exactly what the damage is and how people everywhere have been affected to varying degrees so we see the injustice very clearly and concretely.... as opposed to many of the examples of this same kind of dishonesty and of sold out politics who often affect marginalized communities and groups of people and that damage that can sometimes be hard to see (or easy to dismiss) for anyone not directly involved - and those affected can more easily be discredited by the powers, so that the rest of us comes to believe what we're told and that these groups shouldn't even be taken seriously.


One very real example of this that makes the point clear to me, was the way the protests against the G20 meeting in Toronto last year were (mis)handled but most of all was the way people chose to support government and police, to ignore or deny the right these peaceful protesters had to express dissent without being harassed, assaulted or arrested and even worse, to blame them for being there in the fist place and for exercising their right to protest. Doesn't that seem like a sick democracy to you? Yet if people are convinced they live in a democracy while simultaneously siding with those in charge as they deny citizens one of the most basic element of a democracy, the right to disagree/protest/dissent peacefully, what do you make of that twisted representation of "democracy"? One where we're so convinced of our democracy and so secure that we no longer question anything and deliberately give away our rights and the means we have to maintain a real democracy? Talk about making it easy for them... I was shocked that so many people reacted this way and I still don't really understand it, to be honest.


And if we were to take the time to look into and start making a list of all these instances where governments act against people's interests and instead make it easier for corporations, industries or whatever to damage, defraud or destroy for ultimum profit - you'd probably find a pattern of propaganda against those who oppose or fight the injustices, you'd probably realize you yourself bought into the media's portrayal meant to discredit those who try to fight back and you'd see how they are all the same when you look at the big picture. Money is power. Corporations and the few people at the very top have it, always will want more and more of it and will always be prepared to damage, destroy and defraud anything and anyone that stands in their way. Politicians are mere puppets, sold to the highest bidder and busy keeping everyone oblivious to what they're up to.


If they're smart, we'll never even know about it. If they're too greedy or arrogant, they might not be able to keep it from us. But even if we find out, it just means they have to work a little harder at either distracting us long enough for us to forget or softening us up by finding a way to reassure us that it's all A-ok....because afterall, we do live in a democracy. Right.


That's what I think anyway. Ours is a very corrupt and sick system. And it's made even more messed up by the fact that we are blissfully holding on to the idea that this is democracy. Go figure. And if anyone actually made it to the end of my post: You rock. lol

 

[HankQuinlan]

Kairos was of the opinion that it worked the same in Canada as it works in the USA, you give a donation to a political party and they give you a nice big, fat cheque on the government's account.

Where was Kairos accused of donating to political parties? I never saw a reference to that. And the main problem is still not about why they were denied funding (I am suspicious of all religious charities, but they do seem pretty legitimate), but the fact that the minister and the government lied about it (and forged -- or allowed to be forged -- the document instead of following established legal procedures).

The fact is, that the G20 protestors lost the support of many when the first thing they did is riot, burn police cars and attack street level businesses. Free speech does not include permission to riot.

In fairness again, the vast majority of protesters were peaceful, but the media only seemed interested in looking for examples of hooliganism, and barely dealt with the issues that the legitimate protesters were raising.

Canada is pretty good at resisting the demands of the big Corporate interests.

I agree with most of what you say, but I still see our problems as "US Light." We don't have the extremes of the US system, but we have most of the same problems, in our "lighter" Canadian way. We still have the rich making more money every year, and the banks reaping huge profits, while the rest of us see our incomes shrink. We have the same culture of rewarding top executives with ridiculous pay compared to workers. We structure our tax system for the benefit of the rich. And, our corporate media emphasizes the corporate agenda. When they come for the CBC, is when I will be out on the street carrying my sign.

And, our economy is so closely tied to that of the US, that when they go down, we will be tangled in the lines and get dragged down with them, even if we continue to take more sensible precautions than they.

 

[maroonedsailor]

try this idea on for size - anyone, individual or corporate, should be allowed to contribute any amount of funds to any electoral campaign BUT 100% of the contribution will go into a central fund to be distributed equally among all qualified candidates regardless of party affiliation. Simple and effective way to eliminate corporate or other contributions with an ax to grind or a payoff in mind.

 

[ThisEndUp]

try this idea on for size - anyone, individual or corporate, should be allowed to contribute any amount of funds to any electoral campaign BUT 100% of the contribution will go into a central fund to be distributed equally among all qualified candidates regardless of party affiliation. Simple and effective way to eliminate corporate or other contributions with an ax to grind or a payoff in mind.

does that include unions and soecial intrest groups?

 

[jnewton]

As long as we believe that and we feel secure that everything is A-ok, those in power will be get away with all kinds of abuse. They won't be bothered to make decisions with our interests in mind but will rather reward themselves and those who offer the most money! And just as it is done now, people will see the corruption and continue to respond with apathy. The thing to realize is that you can't view this specific issue we're discussing as new, unique or unusual.

Politicians are mere puppets, sold to the highest bidder and busy keeping everyone oblivious to what they're up to.

In the 1880's and 1890's, Thomas Hodgkin wrote about the fall of the Roman Empire. At the end of the volume about the Huns and the collapse of Imperial power in Italy, he made some observations about the structural problems in the Roman body politic. One of his observations in particular has given me pause whenever I read it. I quote below:

"Will the great democracies of the twentieth century resist the temptation to use political power as a means of material self-enrichment? With a higher ideal of public duty than has been shown by some of the governing classes which preceded them, will they refrain from jobbing* the commonwealth? Warned by the experience of Rome, will they shrink from reproducing directly, or indirectly, the political heresy of Caius Gracchus, that he who votes in the forum must be fed by the state? If they do, perhaps the world may see democracies as long-lived as the dynasties of Egypt or of China. If they do not, assuredly now as in the days of our Saxon forefathers, it will be found that he who is 'giver of bread' is also lord. The old weary round will recommence, democracy leading to anarchy, and anarchy to despotism, and the national workshops of some future Gracchus will build the palaces in which British or American despots, as incapable to rule as Arcadius or Honorius, will guide mighty empires to ruin, ... "

*Jobbing: Using opportunities of public service for private gain; as, a jobbing politician.

 

[HankQuinlan]

I'm not going to go to the extent of directly pointing to Kairos donations, you won't find them as Kairos, they are in the name of various officers of the charity.

Here is where to look http://www.elections.ca/home.aspx Click on the Political Financing button. If you think about it, and know what Kairos is about, you will guess which candidates names to enter in the search dialogue.

Here is the Kairos website so you'll be able to figure out who the officers are. http://www.kairoscanada.org/

I'm sure you'll be able to figure out why Bev Oda wouldn't sign a document that approved a gift of 7 million dollars to Kairos. It would have been a different and much more damaging scandal if she had given them money.

Why so cryptic? Give me a clue. Am i supposed to search to see if someone in the Mennonite Service Committee donated to NDP candidates? If there was to be a scandal because of some donation that a core member made to someone in government, why can't I find any reference to that?

The standard belief is that they were denied funding because they are the "wrong" religious group, and they have a political advocacy component that was against policies of the Cons. The Harper government has no hesitation giving financial support to faith-based groups, so that isn't it.

Many believe that the funding was denied by the direct intervention of Harper himself, and that all the lying and the lack of memory that Oda seemed subject to was because she had to deny this.

Come on, what is the scandal that was averted by denying the funding?