Anonymous To Release Document Proving BOA Committed Fraud on Monday?

[Modelworks]

The prisoners run the prisons. No surprises for me anymore. Hell, we still got Gheitner as a treasury secretary and he participated and knew about what caused a lot of the problems to happen. What do we do ? Put him in charge of course.

 

[Modelworks]

Last I checked abortion is legal, banking fraud not so much.

Not according to Greenspan . He considered banking fraud just part of the way the system works and something that shouldn't be illegal because the market will take care of those who go to far. The way he talks it is like their own personal club where the members decide who can play and what the rules are.

 

[nonlnear]

Then we agree. You're ready to throw away democracy and rule of law when you don't get your way.

I don't believe in the rule of law or democracy. The rule of law is only as good as its application to law makers and law enforcers, and that's laughable at best. (And even when the powers that be are relatively well behaved, the Rule of Law is just as philosophically ill-conceived as the Consent of the Governed. It's a bad joke, really.)

 

[Jhhnn]

Not that I support Anonymous in this, but they wouldn't have an opportunity if the DoJ had been doing their job. Of course, the DoJ wouldn have a job to do if the Bush Admin had done their job enforcing existing regulations and being the people's advocate rather than the Bankstas' advocate...

Self regulated banking and the Ownership society- what a swell idea.

 

[Infohawk]

Confirming infohawk is a fascist apologist for BoA

Edit: I'm beginning to think Infohawk works at one of these parasitic institutions.

You guys are really ridiculous. Believing in the rule of law and democracy is not the same as fascism. You guys are like GWB and his "your either with us or against us." True extremists.

 

[nonlnear]

Not that I support Anonymous in this, but they wouldn't have an opportunity if the DoJ had been doing their job. Of course, the DoJ wouldn have a job to do if the Bush Admin had done their job enforcing existing regulations and being the people's advocate rather than the Bankstas' advocate...

The systemic failure of the Department of inJustice is hardly a partisan problem. If it really were just Bush's fault (and don't get me wrong, dubya didn't do the country any favors in terms of good laws or good law enforcement), we should have seen some noticeable change from the Obama administration, right? But after all the cock stroking of the Presidential campaign about how Obama is going to be tough on the banks, we have come to discover (for those who hadn't already guessed it) that he's as big a pal to the banking lobby as Bush ever was. Even moreso, in that Obama had the ability to get a block of voters to back a friend of the banksters that no Republican ever could. Bush sold a corporatist regime to a constituency that is at least somewhat comfortable with tolerating it in order to get their few policy crumbs after the lobbyists feast. Obama sold a corporatist regime to a constituency that would only accept it if it were hidden inside a big wooden horse.

 

[Phokus]

You guys are really ridiculous. Believing in the rule of law and democracy is not the same as fascism. You guys are like GWB and his "your either with us or against us." True extremists.

You know what? If you believe in rule of law, i'm sure you were against the black disenfranchised people of the pre-civil rights south who forced their way onto private property to do the lunch counter sit-ins despite management telling them to get out and probably going against city/state laws as well:

Sometimes power gets so entrenched that the only way to get to truth and justice is by violating law and order.

But you sound like the type that would rather see corruption protected rather than justice served; you are exactly what's wrong with this country.

Edit: And invoking GWB is fucking retarded considering he used government secrecy and lies to the public to start his unjust wars, these are the types of things that need transparency which organizations like wikileaks give us.

 

[Infohawk]

You know what? If you believe in rule of law, i'm sure you were against the black disenfranchised people of the pre-civil rights south who forced their way onto private property to do the lunch counter sit-ins despite management telling them to get out and probably going against city/state laws as well

It's called civil disobedience doofus and the civil rights movement is not comparable to wikileaks or anonymous. Those in the civil rights movement weren't trying to punish anyone. There's a reason why Ghandi and MLK are heroes and the Black Panthers have far fewer fans. Nice try at appearing noble though.

 

[Phokus]

It's called civil disobedience doofus and the civil rights movement is not comparable to wikileaks or anonymous. Those in the civil rights movement weren't trying to punish anyone. There's a reason why Ghandi and MLK are heroes and the Black Panthers have far fewer fans. Nice try at appearing noble though.

How is it different? They disobeyed civil laws and ignored private property rights, two things you seem to cherish and hold dear. Hacking into a computer system is far less intrusive than me forcing myself onto your business/property and refusing to leave. Also, MLK didn't work in a vacuum, without violence from the riots destroying cities, he would have been a FAR less convincing alternative.

 

[Infohawk]

Also, MLK didn't work in a vacuum, without violence from the riots destroying cities, he would have been a FAR less convincing alternative.

People don't respond well to violence and you're naive if you think that is what pushed the civil rights movement forward. There's a reason why MLK gets a holiday and the Black Panthers don't. Anonymous is punitive and hides in the shadows. MLK was out in the open and practiced passive resistance. It's a very big difference. And that's not even getting into the fact that Scientology and whatever else anonymous is attacking this week are nowhere near as bad as racism.

 

[Jhhnn]

The systemic failure of the Department of inJustice is hardly a partisan problem. If it really were just Bush's fault (and don't get me wrong, dubya didn't do the country any favors in terms of good laws or good law enforcement), we should have seen some noticeable change from the Obama administration, right? But after all the cock stroking of the Presidential campaign about how Obama is going to be tough on the banks, we have come to discover (for those who hadn't already guessed it) that he's as big a pal to the banking lobby as Bush ever was. Even moreso, in that Obama had the ability to get a block of voters to back a friend of the banksters that no Republican ever could. Bush sold a corporatist regime to a constituency that is at least somewhat comfortable with tolerating it in order to get their few policy crumbs after the lobbyists feast. Obama sold a corporatist regime to a constituency that would only accept it if it were hidden inside a big wooden horse.

I can't argue terribly with that, other than to say that the bailout was a done deal before Obama took office. The other constructive alternative, nationalization, had already been ruled out & sealed off. The bailout money was already on the table. It's also important to realize that modern banking is largely a matter of confidence, so prosecuting the people being bailed out doesn't promote the confidence needed to create any sort of recovery.

Obama's actions are in no way a reasonable excuse for the actions of his predecessor in allowing the bubble and subsequent collapse to happen, or in exploiting the bubble for political gain in the campaign of 2004.

Current efforts by the new Repub HOR to deny funding for proposed regulatory efforts is illustrative of their true intentions. Democrats, at least, acknowledge that steps must be taken to prevent this kind of flimflam in the future, even if I think their approach is weak.

 

[Phokus]

People don't respond well to violence and you're naive if you think that is what pushed the civil rights movement forward. There's a reason why MLK gets a holiday and the Black Panthers don't. Anonymous is punitive and hides in the shadows. MLK was out in the open and practiced passive resistance. It's a very big difference. And that's not even getting into the fact that Scientology and whatever else anonymous is attacking this week are nowhere near as bad as racism.

Again, you're naive to think MLK happened in a vacuum, black people were rioting all over the united states destroying property and setting cities on fire, you can't discount that. Whites were afraid and MLK was a more attractive alternative at that point. White people (the majority) didn't like blacks who were sick and tired of being subjugated and took direct action (often with violence)? Wow, what a surprise that they wouldn't celebrate the black panthers, are your retarded? These are the same people who will shout about MLK's 'nonviolence' but nary a peep when it comes to his views of poverty/socialism/pacifism (which doesn't really get talked about in school or the media so every few people know about it). It's almost like whites cynically use MLK's image to their own ends.

Also, people don't respond well to violence?

Do you even know the history of your own country? If our country listened to the loyalists, we'd still might be under british rule

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/American_Revolution

Another example:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/French_Revolution

edit: Not to mention Irish independence.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Provisional_Irish_Republican_Army

 

[nonlnear]

Current efforts by the new Repub HOR to deny funding for proposed regulatory efforts is illustrative of their true intentions. Democrats, at least, acknowledge that steps must be taken to prevent this kind of flimflam in the future, even if I think their approach is weak.

I would say that the Democrats' regulatory "solutions" are so weak that it's hard to see them as anything but defective by design. The House and Senate banking committees are totally compromised, and basically incapable of generating good legislation. This is beyond being a partisan problem.

 

[nonlnear]

I can't argue terribly with that, other than to say that the bailout was a done deal before Obama took office. The other constructive alternative, nationalization, had already been ruled out & sealed off. The bailout money was already on the table. It's also important to realize that modern banking is largely a matter of confidence, so prosecuting the people being bailed out doesn't promote the confidence needed to create any sort of recovery.

I would take this two steps further. Modern society in its entirety is purely a matter of confidence. Extrapolate from there.

 

[JEDIYoda]

News organizations do this frequently at the request of the government. See the story about the CIA agent in Pakistan.

Are you as dumb as your answer??
Whats wrong with what you said?
Assange is in no way holding back documents because he was asked to by a government....duh......
Quite a huge difference..

 

[Infohawk]

Again, you're naive to think MLK happened in a vacuum, black people were rioting all over the united states destroying property and setting cities on fire, you can't discount that. Whites were afraid and MLK was a more attractive alternative at that point. White people (the majority) didn't like blacks who were sick and tired of being subjugated and took direct action (often with violence)? Wow, what a surprise that they wouldn't celebrate the black panthers, are your retarded? These are the same people who will shout about MLK's 'nonviolence' but nary a peep when it comes to his views of poverty/socialism/pacifism (which doesn't really get talked about in school or the media so every few people know about it). It's almost like whites cynically use MLK's image to their own ends.

Also, people don't respond well to violence?

Do you even know the history of your own country? If our country listened to the loyalists, we'd still might be under british rule

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/American_Revolution

Another example:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/French_Revolution

edit: Not to mention Irish independence.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Provisional_Irish_Republican_Army

Now you're comparing wikileaks and anonymous in a democracy to revolutions of despotic governments centuries ago? Ugh. Get over yourself. Sounds like you're willing to kill people to stop banking fraud. Get some help dude.

 

[Generator]

Despite Assange natural douchebaggery he may have stirred up something in a everlasting "Laughing Man" journalism. The NYT was so out of the loop they were pleading with Wikileaks to get some of action. I suggest the NYT learn to hack if they want to get anymore scoops.

How hard could it be to get some information of these corporations and their stupendous greed. So brazen and emboldened Walstreet has become that one has to wonder if the newspapers are not only incompetent but part of the problem.

Meh I guess I shouldn't blame the papers so much. Its the people, the perpetual patsies like Infohawk that put their heads in the ground so they don't even need to look the other way. There is good test to see what this country is made when a jury decides on that one Walstreet crook charged with insider trading. My money will be on that guy walking away, the shills and chumps have embarrassed this country into a pathetic state that one should expect crime pays...always.

 

[Phokus]

Now you're comparing wikileaks and anonymous in a democracy to revolutions of despotic governments centuries ago? Ugh. Get over yourself. Sounds like you're willing to kill people to stop banking fraud. Get some help dude.

LMAO, where did i say that you moron? You were the one who butchered MLK and the history of civil rights and just about the entire history of the world. You need to get help, it's apparent that you're a whore to the near unbreakable merger between government and corporate power. Face it, you're completely wrong on just about everything. Also, it's conservatives who love to bring up violence as a solution: (see every far right group). Go ahead, take your ball and go home.

 

[ichy]

I'll believe it when I see this story in a more legitimate news source than dailykos.

 

[Darwin333]

Hold up to water? Let's cut to the point, you think ends justify the means and you support illegal action if it's aligned with your agenda. You don't really understand the rule of law. You're just a partisan hack.

And what exactly are the people being screwed over by blatant lawlessness supposed to do when the ones doing the screwing are not subjected to the rule of law by both sides of the aisle?

 

[rudder]

There's no such thing as democracy when you have no transparency. You prefer BOA to continue to fuck over the American people (with the government's backing). That's a helluva lot more disturbing than my position.

Before getting into a long drawn out argument... we need to see the numbers. Of all the BoA foreclosed homes.... how many deserved to be foreclosed on?

If they had a huge back log of homes needing foreclosure and had to take short cuts...you can't blame them. If they were trying to kick people out of homes who were 1-2 months behind on their payments... maybe I would have some fraud concerns.

Who was fucking over who? If there was someone who could not afford a house they bought with an interest only loan reset and they are pissed because BoA threw them out after 6 months on non-payment... how long should BoA let them stay in the house?

 

[airdata]

As for Wikileaks you just have to look at Assange's behavior in withholding certain documents as leverage. If he were a real journalist, he wouldn't withhold important information from the public out of self-interest. Also, they are just an unaccountable organization deciding what sensitive information should or should not be released.

If you had government agencies discussing having you assassinated and then having made up rape charges put on you... you'd probably do everything you could to try to leverage yourself.

 

[bamacre]

Someone please tell me why Wikileaks and their supporters like Anonymous are bad again?

"Truth is treason in the empire of lies."

 

[RightIsWrong]

"Truth is treason in the empire of lies."

I absolutely love that quote.

 

[bamacre]

I absolutely love that quote.

The man who said it doesn't get a lot of love.

But you don't have to like him to like the quote.