It seems that every few weeks, another Goldman Sachs executive goes to work for a government agency, with bankers landing in positions of power at the Treasury Department, the Federal Reserve, and pulling the levers of the massive trillion-dollar federal bailout.
At the same time, the bank, which announced on Tuesday that it was hiring former Securities and Exchange Commission Chairman Arthur Levitt, has received $10 billion in TARP funds.
This dual role - with former Goldman executives directing the financial rescue even as the bank took TARP funds - has aroused concern about potential conflicts of interest and excessive influence.
Goldman Sachs is "a political organization masquerading as an investment bank, and they're sitting at the table with the top people in government," says Goldman critic Christopher Whalen, the managing director of Institutional Risk Analytics, which rates banks and provides customer analytics. He calls Goldman "the most political firm on Wall Street."
Do tell more.
Examples include former Goldman exec Henry Paulson, who led the Treasury Department when the bailout was first formulated last September, and who appointed former Goldman vice president Neel Kashkhari to oversee the massive $700 billion TARP fund. There is also the current Treasury Secretary Tim Geithner, who installed a circle of former Goldman bankers to help him navigate the country through the financial crisis.
In case you missed it, libertarians, here is how the REAL WORLD works.
The corridors of power are populated by cliques. A clique is a group of allied individuals, who help each other overtly and covertly.
A perfect example is when you get a job in a company, and then try to get your buddies in there also. I know, I did it myself - not only is it more pleasant to work alongside intelligent, like minded folks whom you trust but also you get allies in the political backstabbing office games.
Oh wait - if you are a white American, you were taught to go it alone and compete based on merit.
My, you ARE a moron, aren't you, my naive whitey-American?
Don't let the door hit you on the ass on your way out as the nice Indian manager replaces, quietly and slowly but always steadily, everybody in his department with his buddies.
Ahem, sorry for the tangent, but this will help explain the following.
Goldman Sachs is a clique, the most successful clique in the US government right now.
"He who controls the gold makes the rules", right?
Well, as you should have gotten from the article I quoted from, Goldman works exactly like the Indian manager in your office, like me in your office (even though I am white, I am an immigrant, and know about cliques. I am NOT like you at all. Beware).
Goldman guys got into the government, and each one tried (and succeeded) in pulling his buddies into positions of power.
One person joins an organization, gets others in, and if it so happens that he is an incompetent boob and one of his buddies gets promoted ahead of him - no worries, he will get pulled up alongside others.
The group takes care of its own, the group moves as one, and the idiotic "strong individuals", who whine about fairness, ethics and, this is most funny, libertarianism are laughed all the way out of the workplace - whether it is a corporation's office, or the US government.
Now you can read this sentence from the article and understand it fully: There is also the current Treasury Secretary Tim Geithner, who installed a circle of former Goldman bankers to help him navigate the country through the financial crisis.
Yes, I am sure that Timmy boy got all his buds from Goldman Sachs into government positions... for the good of the country.
And Goldman has more than 30 ex-government officials working as registered lobbyists on staff, including former House Majority Leader Richard Gephardt (D-Mo.) to represent its interests on issues related to TARP, according to Mother Jones.
This is a great clique, indeed.
Just to ram this point down your throat into the places where the sun don't shine, and then out again, lets go to another random article on the web.
Remember that Lehman Brothers, Goldman's competitor, was allowed to go bankrupt. The Paulson crowd wouldn't let Lehman change its status to that of a bank holding company and thus qualify for federal funds; soon afterward, Goldman was granted just such a deal, worth a quick $10 billion. Much is now made of Goldman paying back part of its bailout money, but forgotten is the $12.9 billion that Goldman got as its cut of the $180 billion AIG payoff. That is money that will not be paid back.
Lehman Brothers was a competitor of Goldman Sachs, but, alas, they were clueless about how the game of life is played.
And so they were fucked.
To receive government bailout money, YOUR tax money, your organization could not have been a financial Wall Street predator - it must have been a bank.
Why, Lehman Brothers, you were an investment predator, and made some bad calls and trades, lost your money, so kindly roll over and die, mmmkay?
On the other hand, Goldman Sachs, which was exactly the same kind of a Wall Street financial predator, was allowed to become a bank overnight and then receive unlimited funds to help it out in its time of need.
Another thing that not many understand is that Goldman Sachs DID NOT pay back the money it was given by the government.
Oh, they paid back the TARP money all right - and the paid media, like the GE channel with "money honeys" will say this again and again, but the real bailout happened differently.
AIG, the insurer, was used by the financial predators to insure the bad investments and loans they made and increase their ratings (so a bunch of shitty loans, rated F for "fucked up never will get repaid" became insured through AIG and suddenly, through the magic of the capitalism fairy, became AAA++++++++ superb investments - I wrote about that before - look at the post below, in fact).
But then AIG (and the rest of the used patsies) caught on to the fact that even though the CDS, CDO and whatever the fuck else acronym was made up and then insured was shit and worth nothing... or close to nothing.
And AIG guys noticed that they do not have enough money to pay out all these insurance claims on these superb AAA rated financial doo doo.
Government to the rescue - and, while Americans were told that AIG, the insurance giant, must be rescued, in reality AIG was simply a funnel through which the government gave money to the Wall Street financial predators.
So, now you understand the two sentences from the 2nd article: Much is now made of Goldman paying back part of its bailout money, but forgotten is the $12.9 billion that Goldman got as its cut of the $180 billion AIG payoff. That is money that will not be paid back.
For the answer to this question, we need to go back to the very first decision to bail out AIG, made, we are told, by then-Treasury Secretary Henry Paulson, then-New York Fed official Timothy Geithner, Goldman Sachs CEO Lloyd Blankfein, and Fed Chairman Ben Bernanke last fall. Post-Lehman's collapse, they feared a systemic failure could be triggered by AIG's inability to pay the counterparties to all the sophisticated instruments AIG had sold. And who were AIG's trading partners? No shock here: Goldman, Bank of America, Merrill Lynch, UBS, JPMorgan Chase, Morgan Stanley, Deutsche Bank, Barclays, and on it goes. So now we know for sure what we already surmised: The AIG bailout has been a way to hide an enormous second round of cash to the same group that had received TARP money already.
It all appears, once again, to be the same insiders protecting themselves against sharing the pain and risk of their own bad adventure.
Repeating - the taxpayer money funneled through AIG to Goldman Sachs (and others) will NOT be paid back.
It leads us back to the concept of a clique.
It helps when reading this sentence from this 3rd article I linked: (...)we need to go back to the very first decision to bail out AIG, made, we are told, by then-Treasury Secretary Henry Paulson, then-New York Fed official Timothy Geithner, Goldman Sachs CEO Lloyd Blankfein, and Fed Chairman Ben Bernanke(...) to realize that all the names mentioned who were deciding which financial predator, bank and investment organization would receive the most money, and how, and which organization would get less, much less, all of these names are either current members of or past members of Goldman Sachs... well, except for Ben Bernanke.
Odd man out, I guess.
So, in effect, to make it painfully obvious, the men were deciding whether to help their own organization which made them (and continues to make them and their cronies) rich.
I wonder how long they debated IF your tax money should be funneled to Goldman Sachs through TARP and then, by way of deception, through AIG.
But why do I (and Matt Taibi and others) call Goldman Sachs a vampire - indeed, I call it a leech, a parasite?
Because it brings nothing to the system, it is a leech.
The following also illustrates the concept of the GS clique, and brings another player from the past - Rubin, as well as showing what Goldman actually does (from The Nation again):
Before Paulson ran the Treasury Department, another former Goldman head, Robert Rubin, pushed through the repeal of the Glass-Steagall controls on banking activity. While some now play down the significance of this radical deregulation, not so Goldman Sachs CEO Lloyd C. Blankfein--at least not back in June 2007, when the markets were still doing well. "If you take an historical perspective," Blankfein told the New York Times by way of explaining his company's spectacular success at the time, "we've come full circle, because that is exactly what the Rothschilds or J.P. Morgan the banker were doing in their heyday. What caused an aberration was the Glass-Steagall Act."
That 1933 act was repealed in a law signed by President Bill Clinton at Rubin's urging, and in the following eight years Goldman Sachs recorded a 265 percent growth in its balance sheet. "Back then," the Wall Street Journal reports, "Goldman was churning out profits by trading credit derivatives, speculating on currencies and oil and placing big bets [on] the stock market."
Goldman was churning out profits by trading credit derivatives, speculating on currencies and oil and placing big bets [on] the stock market.
To those laissez faire, libertarians and other assorted idiots who state that trading in this way in the market is what capitalism is all about may I give a hearty FUCK YOU!
A Joe Schmoe investing in a company and holding the stock, that is bringing something to the market - that is helping the economy by giving funds to companies so they can produce, provide services, and employ people like you and me.
A bank getting your money and then giving you a small percentage interest each month while loaning this money to businesses and making even bigger profits that way - that is the way capitalism works.
A gigantic clique of ultimate government and business insiders, manipulating the market for bigger personal gains, gaming the marketplace by "pump and dump" and now using more and more sophisticated computer programs to shave nanoseconds off a transaction (yes, my naive libertarian friend who is a day trader - that is what you are up against) brings nothing to the marketplace or the economy.
That is not capitalism - that is laissez faire gone amok.
Speaking of craziness:
High on the list of victims are state governments that have to turn to Goldman for money because the federal government that saved the banks won't do the same for the states, which have watched their tax bases shrink because of the banking meltdown. As the WSJ noted, "issuing debt to ailing governments" is now a growth industry for Goldman.
But wait, I started this article promising to compare and contrast two financial companies, Goldman Sachs and CIT Group.
I hope you get the general idea of what Goldman is - a leech, a parasite.
CIT Group Inc. NYSE: CIT (an abbreviation of an early corporate name of Commercial Investment Trust) is a leading global commercial and consumer finance company, founded in 1908. CIT has more than $70 billion in managed assets. CIT is a Fortune 500 company and is a part of the S&P 500 Index, and is a leading participant in vendor financing, factoring, equipment and transportation financing, Small Business Administration loans, and asset-based lending, and does business with more than 80% of the Fortune 1000.
Got that?
CIT Group is a bona fide small business lender.
When a small business needs money, it cannot do what the savvy politically connected big boys at Goldman do and simply tell their buddies now in government to "gimmie!".
A small to medium business goes to a bank, to a credit union, to CIT Group.
To get equipment, to buy factories, to get trucks, trains, product, to employ people like you and me.
This is a pillar of capitalism - without credit to small and medium business everything stops and you get the financial catastrophe that we have now.
CIT Group is EXACTLY the kind of a company that should be first in line to receive financial help from the government.
Guess who got unlimited financial help and who didn't?
CIT Group, an important lender to smaller companies, said last night that it had failed to persuade the federal government to provide further financial assistance to help it avert a likely bankruptcy filing that could hurt thousands of clients ranging from small clothing manufacturers to retailers such as Dunkin' Donuts and Dell.
Riiiight - obviously Goldman Sachs is much more important to the US economy than CIT Group. A company that manipulates the market to make financial profit based on financial and accounting tricks and market manipulation (ohhhhhh, unproven, of course, and Matt Taibi is so full of it, right?) is much more useful than, say, a financial company that loans money to American business.
The people who steal money from the system - in effect, from you and me - are bailed out, while the people who make a living giving loans to small and medium business - you know, the ones who keep US employed - are NOT important.
NEW YORK--(BUSINESS WIRE)--CIT Group Inc. (NYSE: CIT), a leading provider of financing to small businesses and middle market companies, today announced that it has been advised that there is no appreciable likelihood of additional government support being provided over the near term.
Feel free to click on that link and join the outrage.
We all should be familiar with how "justice" in America is done.
If you are black and young, and you have the misfortune of being nearby a crime scene, chances are a cop car will come, break, and police officers will swoop down and take you in... for "questioning".
Hell, these days, if you are young and white, cops will swoop in and take you in.
And if you are brown and moslem - man, I feel sorry for you.
But what happens when you are a 250 pound (or more) drunk white guy at a bar, and, upon being told by a petite woman bartender that you drunk too much and should go home, beat her.
Beat her so that she falls down.
Beat her as she writhes on the floor.
Kick her.
Then beat her some more.
And kick her again.
And again.
Oh, one caveat - you are a cop.
You should know the answer to this question, of course - nothing happens to you.
This is how "justice" is done in America.
Look at this piece of shit, all smug and a GW Bush patented smirk on his face, walk away from the court as if he owned the place.
As if he owned my city - Chicago.
And, you know - he is right.
He is obviously above the law, and if this piece of shit stopped me at night, and proceeded to beat me, I, all bloody and clothes in tatters, would be taken to jail for "resisting arrest".
After all, a cop's testimony in court is sacred, and I happen to be a young guy...
And, if this piece of shit walks around as if nothing can touch him (he's right), and as if he owns this city (he does), and as if that woman, you and me are vermin whom he can abuse at will (he's right about that too, even if he is out of uniform), imagine how smug the people who REALLY own this country must feel.
People like the CEO of Goldman Sachs, people like Rahm Emanuel, people like Geithner or Bernanke.
If this fat piece of shit is untouchable and can beat a woman on camera, with lots of witnesses, imagine how above the law people like that are.
Short recap: Two Jewish Americans used a non-Jewish American to spy for Israel. The two (former) AIPAC staffers, Steve Rosen and Keith Weissman, passed information that Larry Franklin provided them to Israeli nationals residing in USA (spymasters, or controllers of spies).
The FBI caught on to the spying, and "turned" Franklin - he was told that if he cooperated with the investigation into Israeli/AIPAC spying in America, he would be given a lenient sentence.
Larry Franklin agreed.
Despite blatantly catching the two Jewish Americans, Steve Rosen and Keith Weissman, in the act of handing classified information to their Israeli controllers, you can guess what happened next.
This being America, the two Jewish Americans were immediately pronounced innocent, and the goy traitor, the opportunist, was handed the jail sentence.
But even that was changed to "community service".
What does that tell you about America and what is really going on here?
The man himself, the goy Larry Franklin, has decided to come forward and to defend his record. He did so on the pages of a Jewish American newspaper (of course...), The Forward.
It is an amazing piece and I want to spend a few paragraphs analyzing it.
The title of this (well, lets call it what it is) whitewash is:
Once Labeled An AIPAC Spy, Larry Franklin Tells His Story In an Exclusive Interview, Talk of Antisemitism and Betrayal By Nathan Guttman
From the title itself, we see that the poor Larry guy was a victim of anti-semitism, those terrible, terrible people in the FBI who prosecuted him for no reason.
He, the Irish Catholic, claims as defense of his actions persecution by the teeeeeerrible anti semites.
Wait, it gets much better.
We are just getting started here.
Lets take this whitewash apart.
He [Larry Franklin -AG] still keeps his weekend job, mopping the floors at a nearby Roy Rogers restaurant. In recent years, Franklin also has gained experience in parking cars, digging trenches and cleaning cesspools. In between, he has been searching for a publisher for his book — a manual for saving America from the Iranian threat.
The wet dream of the neocons has even been for the USofA to "take out" Israel's enemies in the Middle East, therefore saving the Israeli Defense Forces for the really important tasks - like enforcing their apartheid policies in Gaza and protecting more and more settlers as they ethnically cleanse (albeit slowly) Palestinians from their own land.
America was stupid enough to listen in to the "experts" from "think tanks" and "institutes", writing policy papers and op/ed pieces warning of mushroom clouds and other scary things, and that Saddam was a new Hitler, and so that it is only right and proper that America "take out" Iraq.
If you have read my articles and/or following the story, the PNAC (Project for the New American Century) was born a few years after a policy paper was written by AMERICAN Jewish citizens for ISRAELI government of the time on how to best protect Israel in the near future.
Simply put, the "Clean Break" paper advocated the "taking out", destabilizing if not outright destroying three main Israeli enemies: Iraq, Iran and Syria.
(However, the "Clean Break" did not say who would be doing the "taking out" and paying the price in blood and money to accomplish those goals).
Surprisingly, the PNAC project advocated the same thing - that (and this is crucial) America "take out" enemies to further its sole superpower status in the world - and on the list of targets were (surprise?) Iraq, Iran and Syria.
THAT is why GW Bush and his neocon band of merry traitors turned 9/11 into a pretext to "take out" Iraq - America went into Afghanistan reluctantly, and if you want to prove it to yourself, read some Bob Woodward books in which GW exclaims (on day 1 of 9/11, without any proof that Iraq had anything to do with that attack on America) - "use this to get at Iraq".
GW, in my view, was simply an overmatched idiot, surrounded by neocons who used his boyish fantasy of one-upmanship with his father (remember - his father was smart enough to NOT go all the way into Iraq during the first Gulf War) to further Israeli goals.
And, if you have been paying attention, it should not be surprising that the "Clean Break" policy paper advising Israel to destroy its enemies and PNAC read like the same thing - they were, after all, written by the SAME people - the SAME Jewish Americans (If you do not believe me or my articles, google together "Clean Break Perle" and then "PNAC Perle" and go from there...).
But lets continue with poor Larry Franklin, the victim of anti-semitism.
Franklin’s narrative of his ordeal (snip) reflects a mixture of naiveté, frustration with government bureaucracy and a deep belief that his views must be heard, even if it meant breaking the rules.
His views must be heard!
Remember that key point - this is Larry's defense.
Some in the government, he believes, “had some fantasy of a conspiracy” that had continued, unabated, after the 1985 arrest and 1987 conviction of Pentagon intelligence analyst Jonathan Pollard on charges of spying for Israel.
According to Franklin, the investigators he dealt with believed “that Pollard had a secret partner, a mole, probably in the OSD.” This quest to expose the mole, Franklin said, was, in part, “energized by a more malevolent emotion — antisemitism.”
Finding spies of an Israeli enemy (lets not kid ourselves here) intelligence service in American intelligence establishment is, according to Larry, "anti-semitic".
Passing documents to Israeli (Jewish American) spies is okee dokee, though - no problems there!
“I was asked about every Jew I knew in OSD [Office of the Secretary of Defense], and that bothered me,” Franklin said. His superiors at the time were both Jewish: Paul Wolfowitz, deputy secretary of defense, and Douglas Feith, undersecretary of defense for policy, whom Franklin believes was a target of the investigation. “One agent asked me, ‘How can a Bronx Irish Catholic get mixed up with…’ and I finished the phrase for him: ‘with these Jews.’” Franklin answered, “Christ was Jewish, too, and all the apostles.” “Later I felt dirty,” he added.
Larry remembers that the deputy secretary of defense of the USofA was Jewish, and the undersecretary of defense for policy also happened to be Jewish.
Hmm, interesting.
Larry here establishes his credentials as a country bumpkin - and the article references this meme with Larry's job being the cleaning up of a restaurant, as well as parking cars, cleaning cesspools and other assorted nonsense, alongside the fact that he is not Jewish and yet is persecuted for his association with (very influential) Jewish Americans - anti-semitism against a goy!
Of course, the article shoots itself in the foot with this:
Franklin, who speaks seven languages and holds a doctorate in East Asian studies, tends to weave historical references easily into his discourse, from ancient Greece to the modern days.
Country bumpkin he is not - I do not see a hick idiot becoming an intelligence analyst for the American intelligence.
President, yes, an intelligence analyst - no.
Lets continue with the article:
In exchange for his cooperation with federal prosecutors, Franklin was initially sentenced to 12.5 years in prison as part of his plea agreement. But before entering his plea in 2005, he was approached by two people who suggested he fake his suicide and disappear to avoid testifying in court. At the request of the FBI, to which he immediately reported the encounter, Franklin had several follow-up conversations on the phone with one of them. “I thought I was in a movie,” Franklin said of the episode. Details of the event are still under court seal, and Franklin declined to identify the individuals who approached him or to offer further details.
Larry was approached by two men who told him that it would be better if he faked his own suicide and disappeared.
Scared for his life (the two Israeli hitmen were probably deadly serious about the "suicide" part, but not too clear about the "faked" bit), Larry went to the FBI for protection. And got it.
And in case other spinsters want to spin this as some surreal situation where Larry was not threatened, but was gently asked by the two (99% sure) Israelis to fake his own suicide... Come on! Of course Larry's life was threatened by the Israeli hitmen!
Of course, it is patently obvious, it was a threat on Larry's life, scaring him shitless.
The amazing thing (well, this is America, so it is normal here) is that we do not know the names of the Israeli thugs who threatened Larry's life, nor will they be ever revealed.
It is acceptable in America for Israeli agents to threaten the life of an American and get away with it, apparently.
Larry, shitting himself, reported all of this to the FBI, who protected him.
Why was there an investigation into Israeli spies in America, in the first place?
Why, anti-semitism, of course.
In part, it [the investigation into AIPAC spying -AG] was also fed by a deep suspicion toward Israel. “In the intelligence community,” he said, “you refer to Israelis as ‘Izzis’ and it doesn’t have a pleasant connotation. They can’t get away with kikes, so they say Izzis.” This suspicion became clear to Franklin as he learned of the way investigators viewed activists of the pro-Israel lobby.
He said it was made clear to him by the FBI that Rosen, then AIPAC’s foreign policy director, was the target of the investigation and had been followed by the FBI for years. “The bureau told me Rosen was a bad guy,” he said. Believing that he himself had “done wrong,” Franklin agreed to cooperate with the FBI investigation.
Larry was caught red handed by the FBI, on tape and recorded, as he passed information to Rosen. Having no choice, he turned and started to (for the first time in his life?) work for his own country, the United States of America.
This cooperation culminated in a June 26, 2003, meeting at an Italian restaurant in Arlington, Va., where Franklin was sent by the FBI to carry out a sting operation against the AIPAC lobbyists. Before his meeting with Weissman, agents wired Franklin with microphones and transmitters and provided him with a fake classified document alleging there was clear life-threatening danger posed to Israelis secretly operating in Iraq’s Kurdish region. Passing on the information would help seal the case against the AIPAC staffers.
“At the time, I believed they were guilty,” Franklin said of Weissman and Rosen. Yet he still came to the meeting with mixed feelings. He put the document on the table, but hoped Weissman would not reach out for it. “And when he did not take the document, I did breath a silent sigh of relief,” he recalled. In retrospect, Franklin sees that moment as “one I am not proud of.”
Though Weissman didn’t take the document, he read its content, which was allegedly classified, and the sting operation succeeded. Weissman hurried back to AIPAC headquarters with the supposedly classified information disclosed it to Rosen, who subsequently relayed it to an Israeli diplomat.
Read the last sentence.
Understand.
Larry gives a classified document to Weissman, an AIPAC member. Judging that the danger of actually taking the document was too much (Weissman was trained well in spycraft), he nevertheless got the information memorized, hurried to another AIPAC staffer, Rosen, and then Rosen quickly passed the info to an Israeli Embassy official - a resident spy.
The reason why the sting worked was that the information (the fake information provided by American intelligence) was "hot" - Israeli lives were supposedly in danger in Iraqi Kurdistan, and so the two "Americans" (well, American citizens in legality, but hardly in reality) hurried to get that information to their Israeli spymasters at the Israeli Embassy.
(Brief note: so there are multiple Israeli agents in Iraqi Kurdistan then?! What the fuck are they doing there?!).
The meeting of Rosen with that Israeli embassy official (still unidentified - you can be sure that that person is STILL not thrown out of the country, is not a persona non-grata and continues to happily spy for Israel in America) did not take place at the embassy.
It was an emergency, the information was hot, so that Rosen made a phone call the the "emergency" phone number he knew to call when Israeli lives were in danger, and within a short while met the Israeli "diplomat" in an out of the way place.
All of this was on tape, recorded by the FBI, very professionally trailing Larry, Weissman and Rosen without them noticing (Who said Americans are stupid? What a great job at covert surveillance - kudos to you, patriots!).
Larry now tries to bolster his "country bumpkin" defense:
Franklin said he felt betrayed by the two former AIPAC staffers. He believed that he was sharing information with them so that they could pass it to other government officials, and was disappointed to learn they conveyed it to Israeli diplomats and to the press. “I do think they crossed a line when they went to a foreign official with what they knew was classified information,” Franklin said.
You see, Larry wants us to believe that the information he passed to the Jewish Americans would be passed to some more important AMERICAN government officials, because all that he, Larry, wanted was to warn American government officials of the danger of the Iranian threat.
Franklin warned that Americans “would return in body bags” from Iraq because of Iranian intervention, and called for a preliminary show of force against Iran before invading Iraq, but got no response. Viewing the AIPAC lobbyists as well connected, Franklin bypassed his superiors and asked Rosen to convey his concerns on Iran to officials at the National Security Council, to whom he believed the influential lobbyist had access.
“I wanted to kind of shock people at the NSC,” he said, “to shock them into pausing and giving another consideration into why regime change needed to be the policy.”
Riiiiight - so to get to the National Security Council, Larry the silly country bumpkin passed classified documents to AIPAC staffers, whom everybody KNOWS spy for and work for Israel and Israeli interests.
Larry wanted to steer America into a "show of force" against Iran BEFORE invading Iraq, because (and here the logic of his defense gets murky) Larry wanted Iran to, uh, be so afraid of America that they would not interfere against the American invasion.
Also Larry wanted to impress upon the NSC that "regime change [in Iran- AG] needed to be the policy"
And if you believe that, I have a bridge in Brooklyn to sell you.
No, what Larry and his spymasters wanted was to broaden the Middle Eastern shit that the USA was stepping in - remember, "Clean Break" writers and then PNAC writers (they are the SAME people, by the by, recall?) wanted America to take out multiple Israeli enemies - Iraq, Iran and Syria... and Lebanon for good measure.
So Larry's "show of force" had every chance of becoming a hot war between Iran and America before the American invasion of Iraq.
And of course Larry had only American interests at heart, and the poor American boys coming home in body bags, because a "show of force" on Iran which had every chance of becoming a hot war necessitating American bombing (and "liberation"?) of Iran alongside Iraq was in American interests.
That it just tailored so well with the "Clean Break" Jewish American neocons plans was just a coincidence, of course...
But Larry's history of pushing for an American war with Iran goes farther.
Do you remember the Niger yellowcake story, planted by pro Israeli agents in America (who knows - perhaps Rosen and Weissman were involved in that operation too)?
No?
Let me refresh your memory.
In the days before America invaded Iraq, Israeli agents in America (called the neocons), the same people who wrote "Clean Break" and "Project for the New American Century", were desperately trying to seize the historic moment and make America attack Iraq.
One of the fake stories planted was the "Niger yellowcake" story.
Someone (cough Israeli agents cough) planted forged documents stating that Iraq was purchasing uranium from the African nation of Niger. This was done in Italy, and the forgeries were used by the neocons writing their op/ed articles in American newspapers and the neocon "experts" screaming at us from the TV screens about the simple case that Saddam was Hitler and he wants to eat American children for breakfast... and so we must "take out" Iraq.
And isn't it interesting who was involved in this case?
Lets go to Raw Story, a pretty astounding article, dated April 20, 2006.
The Department of Defense and Vice President Dick Cheney have retained the services of Iran-Contra arms dealer and discredited intelligence asset Manucher Ghorbanifar as their “man on the ground,”
(snip)
Speaking on condition of anonymity, three intelligence sources identified the Iran-Contra middleman as having been put back on the payroll, acting as a human intelligence asset and monitoring any movement in discussions about Iran’s alleged burgeoning nuclear weapons program.
Ghorbanifar was also present at discussions in Rome in 2001 – talks which have received much attention because they were attended by Pentagon and Iranian officials. According to neoconservative Michael Ledeen, who participated in the talks, the topic was Iran. A second set of meetings later took place in Paris.
So, the guy who worked as basically as an intermediary, between America and Iran during the Reagan era Iran-Contra scandal (the one where the USA sold weapons to Iran and used the profits to fund the Contras in Nicaragua, without Congressional approval or knowledge), was back in the American intelligence business.
And Michael Ledeen.
Remember my crazy assertion that there was a conspiracy by Jewish American neocons to steer America into taking out Israel's enemies?
Ledeen concluded his remarks by declaring, "the time for diplomacy is at the end; it is time for a free Iran, free Syria and free Lebanon."
I realize that this might sound far fetched, crazy and preposterous - but I (and many other, much smarter and erudite people) have spent some time researching this and the conclusion is unmistakable - as is the significance of the timeline. First "Clean Break" was written, then PNAC was born, 9/11 hit, then soon came the screams of neocons to "take out" Iraq, Iran, Syria (all enemies of Israel).
Significantly, the writers of PNAC actually wrote that America needed a "new Pearl Harbor" for their plan for America the stupid becoming a patsy to Israel and making war on its enemies in the Middle East - and magically, 9/11 just happens at the exact time that a "new Pearl Harbor" is called for...
But the most interesting part comes now.
Lets go back off the tangent and back into the Niger yellowcake story.
In an exclusive interview with Newsweek late last year, Ghorbanifar stated that the meetings in Rome and Paris were about regime change in Iran. The meetings included Larry Franklin, a Pentagon Iran analyst who has been convicted for passing secrets to an Israeli lobby, and Harold Rhode, a Defense Department consultant also under investigation in the case.
So, we find our "country bumpkin", Larry Franklin, deep in the "deep state", the secret world of regime change and spying.
Larry Franklin actively working for regime change in Iran under Bush and Cheney.
Per Daily Kos diary, which is superb by the way, "Harold Rhode, a member of the Office of Special Plans, protege of Michael Ledeen and the liason between the administration and Ahmed Chalabi"
Ledeen is, of course, Jewish American.
So what we have was the conspiracy, under the guidance of Cheney who was then American vice president, with full support by Israel and its servants in America, the neocons, against Iran.
The realization of "Clean Break" and PNAC goals - after Iraq, Iran was to follow.
You must understand that GW and Cheney and their neocon merry band of traitors were hell bent on America invading and "liberating" Iraq, all for their own reasons, of course.
GW Bush, the boy emperor, wanted to "one up" his dad, to show him that he was better than him because he had the balls to finish his dad's job.
Cheney was seeing $ signs - any reconstruction of Iraq would involve his pet money making projects, Haliburton and Bechtel.
And the Jewish American neocons were simply realizing "Clean Break" - "taking out" Israeli enemies using American blood and treasure.
But now, the long and winding road leads us at last to Washington DC and the FBI investigation into the AIPAC spy ring. Here we find the usual suspects.
Keyser Soze aka Michael Ledeen.
Michael Ledeen was one of the founders of the Jewish Institute for National Security Affairs (JINSA). He holds the Freedom Chair at the American Enterprise Institute (AEI), a think tank for AIPAC. He is co-founder of the Coalition for Democracy in Iran. As far back as 1980, the CIA allegedly listed Ledeen as an agent of influence of Israel. Ledeen is the main foreign policy advisor to Karl Rove. Ledeens main obsession seems to be to overthrow Iran.
In 1972 he published the book Universal Fascism, in which he expounds upon "the rightness of the fascist cause." In Universal Fascism, Ledeen first builds his case that fascism was the "20th Century Revolution" and that "people yearn for the real thing - revolution". It's the blueprint for a fascist revolution.
In 1980 he collaborated with Francesco Pazienza of SISMI and P-2 in the "BillyGate" affair. This is the same Pazienze who was recently found out to belong to the parallel intelligence agency in Italy. In 1985 Pazienza was found guilty of political manipulation, forgery, and the protection of terrorists. Ledeen is identified in court documents as an agent of SISMI.
The Pentagon downgraded Ledeen's security clearances from Top Secret-SCI to Secret in the mid-1980s, after the FBI began a probe of Ledeen for passing classified materials to a foreign country, believed to be Israel.
In 2001, Ledeen was hired by Feith to work on contract for the Office of Special Plans.
It was Ledeen who got Israeli spy Jonathon Pollard his job in the Navy.
[AmericanGoy here - re-read the last three paragraphs. Pentagon downgrades Ledeen's security clearance, because it is believed that he passes classified documents and info to Israel. In 2001, Douglas Feith, another JEWISH American hires Ledeen to work in the Office of Special Plans.
OSP was Cheney's baby, and it was setup to bypass the CIA analysts and analyze data about Iraqi threat - in effect, to cherry pick the intelligence to find the most alarming, thereby justifying America invading Iraq.
Ledeen got Pollard, the Israeli spy in American jail - imagine that! - his job at the Navy.
Amazing set of "coincidences"]
It was Ledeen who insisted on using Manucher Ghorbanifar, the Mossad double agent, in the Iran-Contra affair.
It was Ledeen who organized the meeting between Rhodes, Franklin and Ghorbanifar on Dec. 1, 2001 in Rome.
On Dec. 12, 2001, U.S. Amb. Sembler has a private dinner with Ledeen and the Italian Defense Minister Antonio Martino. Ledeen and Martino begin discussing the previous meeting with Ghorbanifar which they had both attended. Sembler, deeply concerned that a secret meeting had occured with the recipient of two CIA "burn notices", informed the CIA which in turn informed the White House, specifically Stephen Hadley. Hadley told Ledeen and Co. to back off of Ghorbanifar. But that order was ignored and communication between Ghorbanifar and Rhode continued up to their second face to face in June 2003.
Rhode also met with AIPAC lobbyists, Ahmed Chalabi, Israeli agents and SISMI during this time.
Harold Rhode.
Rhode is a member of the Office of Special Plans. He fervently pushes for the invasion of Iran. He's the main liason between the White House and Ahmed Chalabi. He is a 20 year Middle East expert. He has close ties to Michael Ledeen.
"According to one former senior U.S. intelligence official who maintained excellent contacts with serving U.S. intelligence
officials in the Coalition Provisional Authority in Baghdad, "Rhode practically lived out of (Ahmad) Chalab's office." This same source quoted the intelligence official with the CPA as saying, "Rhode was observed by CIA operatives as being constantly on his cell phone to Israel," and that the information that the intelligence officials overheard him passing to Israel was "mind-boggling," this source said. It dealt with U.S. plans, military deployments, political projects, discussion of Iraq assets, and a host of other sensitive topics, the former senior U.S. intelligence official said." FBI probes DOD office - (United Press International)
Larry Franklin.
Larry Franklin, a Col. in the US Air Force, is considered the Pentagons top Iran analyst. He attended the meeting in Rome with Ghorbanifar. He works for the Office of Special Plans and is a fervent believer in the need to invade Iran. He is now under arrest for allegedly giving state secrets to Isreal through AIPAC.
FBI investigators indicate that they are looking for more than one person. Michael Ledeen and Harold Rhode have to be considered primary suspects.
Let me now include the US District Court Statement of Facts - PDF document for posterity, which, point by point, shows how Larry Franklin spied for the two Israeli agents (I am sorry, innocent victims of anti-semitism...) Weissman and Rosen.
Now, after reading this far, congratulations.
You now know more than 99.999999999999999% of your fellow Americans.
It should be obvious that Larry Franklin was an "agent of influence" (google that term) for Israel for some time now. He is far from a country bumpkin "mopping the floor" of a restaurant, and participated in some brilliant intelligence coups (and some failures - like the Niger yellowcake forgery) to steer America into war on virtually the whole Middle East - every country that Israel dislikes.
Rosen and Weissman were also caught red handed, recorded and taped as they passed classified information to their Israeli contacts from the Israeli embassy.
(Just so I don't get arrested and waterboarded - Franklin, Rosen and Weissman are innocent, of course, after all, the American justice system said so).
What is your reaction?
Amazement? Disgust? Shrug of your shoulders?
Just the way things are?
War with Iran is the neocons wet dream.
And it will come.
Whether under Obama or some other schmuck pushed in front of the camera for the stupid Americans and the rest of the world to admire.
Well, admire away:
Bonus Reading
A few of my articles, some original research and rants into this whole preposterous, insane, incredible, and frankly, impossible conspiracy of Israel using its agents in America to steer American foreign policy (and war making) to suit its own interests.
former U.S. ambassador to the United Nations John Bolton announced on Fox News his belief that “the use of military force” against Iranian training camps “is really the most prudent thing to do.” Responding to a Telegraph report on his comments today, American Enterprise Institute scholar Michael Ledeen declared that Bolton is “right.” Adding that he’s “been proposing this for years,” Ledeen also said that “we should do the same thing to the Syrian camps as well.”
Autumn 1992: Influential Neoconservative Academic Advocates Breaking Up Middle Eastern Countries, Including Iraq
Princeton University professor Bernard Lewis publishes an article in the influential journal Foreign Affairs called “Rethinking the Middle East.” In it, he advocates a policy he calls “Lebanonization.” He says, “[A] possibility, which could even be precipitated by [Islamic] fundamentalism, is what has late been fashionable to call ‘Lebanonization.’ Most of the states of the Middle East—Egypt is an obvious exception—are of recent and artificial construction and are vulnerable to such a process. If the central power is sufficiently weakened, there is no real civil society to hold the polity together, no real sense of common identity.… Then state then disintegrates—as happened in Lebanon—into a chaos of squabbling, feuding, fighting sects, tribes, regions, and parties.” Lewis, a British Jew, is well known as a longtime supporter of the Israeli right wing. Since the 1950s, he has argued that the West and Islam have been engaged in a titanic “clash of civilizations” and that the US should take a hard line against all Arab countries. Lewis is considered a highly influential figure to the neoconservative movement, and some neoconservatives such as Richard Perle and Harold Rhode consider him a mentor. In 1996, Perle and others influenced by Lewis will write a paper for right wing Israeli leader Benjamin Netanyahu entitled “A Clean Break” that advocates the “Lebanonization” of countries like Iraq and Syria
Says Hagel (Senator Chuck Hagel): "The political reality is that... the Jewish lobby intimidates a lot of people up here." Hagel then related a meeting he had in New York with a group of supporters of Israel who are pushing the U.S. to attack Iran. When Hagel said it hadn't worked out that well in Iraq, a couple of members of the group said he wasn't supportive enough of Israel.
When Hagel said it hadn't worked out that well in Iraq, a couple of members of the group said he wasn't supportive enough of Israel.
Hagel spoke firmly: "Let me clear something up here if there's any doubt in your mind. I'm a U.S. Senator. I'm not an Israeli senator. I'm a U.S. Senator. I support Israel... But my first interest is, I take an oath to the constitution of the United States. Not to a president, not to a party, not to Israel."
John Sununu, republican:
It's like a handful of pebbles in the shoe. It's there all the time, and this process of not permitting anything that's trying to tug in the other direction, to gain root and thrive, is almost automatic. And it's not just AIPAC, it happens all the time, everywhere. Every congressman, every senator, before they win, is being soft lobbied on the issue. Whether it's their friend that owns 40 acres down the street whose grandfather happened to have come from Kiev, goes in and talks to him about helping him, developing a social relationship on an issue that has nothing to do with the district, begins to communicate their interest. And rightly so-- pulling on their end of the rope. It happens almost invisibly. But across the board. There is nobody who has run for office in this country who has not been soft lobbied the day they announce that they are going to run and not been hard lobbied after they win.
Finally, I leave you with this - Mr. Weiss at his finest:
Russert's follow up was (during the television presidential debate - AG), " What do you do to assure Jewish Americans that, whether it's Farrakhan's support or the activities of Reverend Jeremiah Wright, your pastor, you are consistent with issues regarding Israel..." (...) Why is it that a candidate must assure Jewish Americans about his being "consistent" on a foreign country, Israel? Isn't this an acknowledgement that American Jews feel dual loyalty? Isn't a call to consistency code for political correctness on this issue, rather than exploration of a miserable situation in Israel/Palestine? Should Russert be honoring dual loyalty feelings, or challenging them? Wasn't Irish-American support for the IRA a controversial issue, rather than a Law of Politics, as Russert seemed to say? And is supporting Israel an American interest or a Jewish American interest? If only the latter, shouldn't that be the subject of journalism?
The whole point of FDR's New Deal in the 1930's was not to alleviate the symptoms of the Great Depression.
It was not done to help ordinary Americans, either (who cares about those idiots?!).
No, the whole point of it was to placate the middle and lower classes with enough busy work, enough government money so that they would not revolt and start hanging the elites from the nearest trees.
Remember your history?
You must remember from school that in the 1930's the Soviet Union was a powerful symbol, basically a big fuck you to the world led by the "democratic" elites.
This was very alarming to the Goldman Sachs types of the day and it was decided that action must be taken, so that the unwashed masses would not, you know, clench their fists, wave red flags and start, you know, going into the multi million dollar mansions and, well, shooting the man and lady of the house (and their children just back from the private school to tidy up).
It was only later that the world learned that a certain ethnic minority had the biggest role in the so called Russian revolution, and that the leading role of this leading minority was only finally curtailed by Stalin - he simply murdered them alongside some random victims in the so called purges.
And of course, even if you don't know anything about history, the name of Hitler must be somewhat familiar to you.
The Germans did not get any New Deal, or any deal at all.
Ordinary Germans did not get any help from their government...
...and their middle class got a tad bit restless... the rest you know.
Lets fast forward to today.
There is no Soviet Union. In fact, there is absolutely no challenge to the American global supremacy.
Worst case scenario: Going with the idea that the elites of today are more greedy and yet more stupid than the ones of years past, the American middle class will be offered exactly nothing.
Well, some things will be changed by the greatest PR machine in history - the Obama machine. Credit cards will now print their statements in a legible, non-nonsensical form (wow! progress!). Perhaps Obama will smile more on TV than usual. Things like that.
But other than superficial nonsense along those lines, nothing will change, and you can be sure that something as radical as forgiving a person's credit debt or making a government healthcare program to compete with for profit non-healthcare private firms (note: the healthcare insurance business model is this: the more healthcare they deny you, the more money they make) is out of bounds.
There will be war, if not Iraq than something else will come along. In fact, it seems that Afghanistan is a more profitable enterprise than Iraq - drugs, you know. Even the Russians are making noises that Americans are going too far in this whole capitalism thing - in case you don't remember, use the godly google and find out for yourself the following fact - that while Taliban was in power, ALL opium production was stopped.
Stopped, 100% gone.
Now, with the Americans in charge, Afghanistan is drug central, billion dollar traffic going into Europe and USA.
War is great for the system.
The only hope for this country is reforming - as in destroying completely - the lobby (legalized bribery) system. And Mr. Hope and Change has no inkling for even minimally curtailing the power of the lobbies, so that our politicians will not be bought by private corporations and foreign countries
That is out of the question - after all, lobbying = free speech!
So, hope and change is exactly that - keep hoping for that change! And watch that TV - American Idol is on!
So, since a New Deal is no needed - after all, Americans are far too stupid, too hassles, too busy, too stupified by TV and other media, no Soviet Union agents of influence to stir up trouble - what is going to happen?
Are the elites going to throw the idiot masses a mangy bone, like they did in the 1930's?
Hell no.
The worst case scenario is simply this: the only thing the American middle class is gonna get from the elites is a middle finger.
Don't get bogged down on detail - always strive to see the big picture.
When in a forest, look at the trees, but also make sure you don't miss the forest all around you.
Look at the news and analyze WHY it's happening, not just HOW and WHEN.
If you like this philosophy, this is the blog for you as I analyze today's news and tell you what is behind the scenes, who the real players are and what are their motivations.
