This page has been archived and commenting is disabled.
Why is National Security Being Invoked to Keep Basic Financial Information Secret?
Reuters notes:
U.S.
securities regulators originally treated the New York Federal Reserve's
bid to keep secret many of the details of the American International
Group bailout like a request to protect matters of national security, according to emails obtained by Reuters.
The national security claim may seem outlandish, but it is nothing new.
As Business Week wrote on May 23, 2006:
President
George W. Bush has bestowed on his intelligence czar, John Negroponte,
broad authority, in the name of national security, to excuse publicly
traded companies from their usual accounting and securities-disclosure
obligations.
In other words, national security has been
discussed for years as a basis of keeping normal accounting and
securities-related disclosures secret.
Why?
- advertisements -
Why? Because we're living in a fascist oligarchy, that's why.
Monday1929 here.
That too. But what is eluding y'all is the simplist reason of all: Bernanke, Obama, Paulson have all admitted that we "were" at the edge of the abyss. Well, that abyss is still right where it was, in fact it's edged a bit closer as we backed away. The big National Security issue, as I've discussed on minyanville, is simply that the big banks are still insolvent and there are still several trillion more in losses to be taken. The very existence of the Nation is endangered by the 80 Trillion Elephant that is Jamie Dimon's unregulated derivative position.
Lee S.
Whassa matta you don't like the I heart gang violence t-shirt they brought you back from vacation in Davos.
+1
http://marketoracle.co.uk/images/2010/Jan/us-collapse-18-11.gif
'nuff said.
That does explain quite a bit
That graph certainly says a lot about our future.
Whaddya bet most of the "aircraft" orders are for UAVs, the equipment to fly them, and the ordinance (death from above).
I and others were successful in getting both my Senators (MN) to vote against the Iraq War Resolution. PLEASE lobby with all your power when the next war powers scam goes down.
Why?
Because no disclosure =no argument
no audit= no wrong
if a fugazy piece of art circulates as authentic is it fugazy?
Fight Back
If they are "too big to fail" let's help them get smaller and make our national banking system healthier...
If you are tired of the Wall Street bankster bailout program at taxpayers expense but feel helpless to do anything about it then keep reading. If record profits for the big six banks (and big bonuses for the executives there) that took your tax dollars makes you wonder exactly who is in charge then read on. If you get upset about the Goldman Sachs executive retirement plan (become US Treasury Sec and cash out lifetime personal portfolio tax free AND help out your old pals on Wall Street) for Wall Street banksters then get ready to fight back.
http://www.321gold.com/editorials/laborde/laborde012610.html
It's either Bugs' explanation or what they're hiding has the possibility of bringing the Republic down.
I’ll tell you why.
I am turning 61 this year and I’m an erstwhile hippie who is way more pissed off about what is happening in Washington and to the economy than I ever was about Vietnam.
Perhaps they deem the secret keeping to be in the interest of national security because they know or fear that we are getting very close to a tipping point where people will be marching in the streets again.
Only this time they won’t be singing or chanting as many slogans.
I'm only 56 but I'm with you on that. The problem is that the people running these companies were the same folks who protested the war -- they just got a promotion.
[They were also most likely the same ones who were constantly bogarting ... ;-)]
Wrong. The ones who ran this whole scam were the straights who detested the marchers and called them "draft-dodgers". After the election of Nixon there was a counter-revolution in this country, and Reagan drove the final nail into the coffin of the revolution with the firing of the air traffic controllers.
well it is not so much the people who run companies. they are swimming in a sewer. when you swim there, you start to smell bad. goes with the territory. ron paul said get rid of the FED.
it is....
just that simple....
If you're 61, than you were 31 when all of this started.
You didn't think that perpetually living in debt and government deficits while offshoring all the jobs that Americans need would lead to these eventual problems?
Why the sudden outrage now? Maybe the baby boomers can cut 10 million more jobs to get one profitable quarter and borrow money from their kids for a few more years before they retire.
Master,
You are correct to be enraged at what is going on; however, it begs the question. What have people younger than Boomers been doing, besides electing Obama?
Can't blame it on the Boomers. The Blue Hairs, yes, blame it on them. They got SS and Medicare, and those who are still ticking are still taking, and will be right up to the moment the last of 'em keels over dead.
I'm 52, and I know my generation won't be getting SS or Medicare. I also know that the folks born after the Boomer years are doing absolutely nothing to protect themselves and are in fact lined up, all the time, for most government goodies they can grab.
That's same o same o in my book.
Don't look for a generational war or you just might get one, and that'll do no good at all. There are one hell of alot of Boomers and that'll be an angry crowd. I hope my generation does the right thing, and understands that it isn't right to try to take from the younger people...but I don't know if that will be the case.
It's OK Wussy Bates, Anon was bitching about the war in Vietnam then, raging on his elders JUST LIKE YOU and ultimately could do nothing about either and
he can not do anything now...
JUST LIKE YOU.
Your pathetic whining is only matched by your stupendous ignorance.
You'll find out.
In the mean time. . .
Get back on your "green" skateboard and get lost.
MasterBates, it's the scenario of the pusher and the addict. We blame the addict for being addicted, but we somehow let the pusher slide, and fail to acknowledge that he's an expert manipulator, able to take advantage of normal, human vulnerabilities and turn people INTO addicts who would otherwise not be had they not met him.
Continue the story further. The pusher keeps the addict "happy" on the drug and they are quite a duo, symbiotically attached. The addict "needs" the drug, and the pusher "needs" the revenue the addict provides.
Then let's say there's a cataclysm, a jolt, a shock, and they both have an opportunity to wake up and realize they don't "need" what they thought they "needed" at all!! The addict starts to desire to get off the drug... does the pusher let him? Or, as is more common, does the pusher "suddenly" (and falsely) stage a shortage of the drug so that the addict, instead of being able to taper off is suddenly without his substance. The addict, as you know, will start to go through withdrawal and freak out, desperately reaching for the pusher to re-supply fast! This delights the pusher, and when he deems that the edge has been reached (he's an expert of manipulation after all), he gallops back in on a big white horse and "saves the day" with more supply, keeping the addict "happy".
The metaphor is that first the addict has to wake up and realize that the drug isn't life. That's the answer to *this* question. We were drugged before, are now waking up, and don't like what we are finding to be the status quo.
Second is to realize that the more the addict pulls away, the more the pusher manipulates to keep him enslaved!! It takes HUGE, superhuman courage for an addict to actually get away from a pusher. Thankfully many do.
Pushers can also wake up and choose a different way, but it's not very common.
Pushers = elite moneyed interests, big corporations
Addicts = us
steady ! . there is a lot of boomers on here with 401k's and not afraid to use them. (even if this did grow to exponential proportions on their watch)
At least they have 401k's. By the time we entered the workforce, many companies didn't have 401k's or health care.
What about the retirement of people my age? Should we just keep paying the debt that previous generations accrued for their own personal comfort?
Should the people who don't even have the ability to buy a house pay exorbitant taxes so that some people can stay in their homes with an extra bathroom and granite countertops?
I just think that it's amusing, to say the least, that the people that have done basically nothing while this country has been hollowed out are suddenly outraged NOW.
Where was the outrage 20 or 30 years ago?
These humans. Like a virus. They spread everywhere.
Agent Smith
Typical rage against anyone but themselves. What have you done about it lately.
Blame it on the Boomers, that's it.
If it wasn't the Baby Boomers, then who was responsible?
Was it my generation - generation Y? Was it the greatest generation?
I've done everything I can to keep my head above water and get an education even though the economy has been perpetually screwed since I turned 18. I graduated high school into a recession, worked for a few years, and then got hit with the Great Depression II.
What have the people that have been in charge since I've been alive been doing? Printing more money, borrowing from my generation, and offshoring jobs every year?
Every day we search for the responsible culprits. The challenge is that there are so fucking many of them from every generation. Governments, bankers, investment houses, mortgage brokers, builders, hedge funds, private equity.
America used to roll along quite nicely on a flatbed of discreet larceny.
Then came the greed.
Most of the truly creative stealing has been devised courtesy of the children of the boomers anyway.
Most boomers remember the absolute rage at the Federal system of the 60s and 70s. Today the rage and mistrust has expanded to include corrupt institutions of all stripes. Consequently, the national security threat of the 60s is exponentially greater today....probably worse tomorrow.
The children of the boomers are between the ages of 20 and 35, tops.
I wouldn't say that we're the ones that have been affecting policy for the last 30 years.
that's not really fair is it? what do you expect Anon could have done about it? Buy a printing press and run off a few gazillion to buy the media and reshape public opinion to boot out all the bankster puppets, that most of us never knew existed until the internet? to blame the older generation is just the kind of division the PTB like to see.
To me, there's a lot that the Baby Boomers might have done in the last thirty years.
I guess that mortgaging my future since the day I was born and then hearing the people that were complicit complain about the future just got under my skin a little bit.
So you're saying that people couldn't get current events, see budget deficits, the national debt, or the offshoring of jobs until the internet?
Seems to me that there's been a slow, steady decline in policy since the Reagan years.
Some of us fought it all the way. Sorry we lost.
no i am not saying that, what i am saying is what could he do about it?
in any case, blaming the victims instead of the crooks is pointless. if you want to blame someone, you could start with Woodrow Wilson... they snuck the Fed in on his watch.
Keeping us divided is the only thing keeping them whole.
Time for a "Pentagon Papers" release.
or some wascally terrorist event, that makes it look like arabs are the enemy and that they did it to us when it was not them at all.....same old , same old......
murda murda murda kill kill kill!
A pleasant article from GW and a good question.
My answer is that if Americans saw who the
counterparties were their anger would be unleashed.