A Conspiracy I believe in, and it is happening right now!

Yitzhak Rabin

Elite are selling our sovereignty to protect Anglo & Irish Nationwide bondholders

This is an article by David McWilliams about a conspiracy that is happening right now about how our government is handing over our sovereignty to the mega rich elite. Please read it. I fully agree with all he has written in this article. The thing that sickens me most is, I don't even know what to do about it! :mad:

David McWilliams wrote:

The last time I checked there was a harp on the front of my passport, not a picture of Michael Fingleton

The other day I met a German radio presenter from ARD, the German public radio station. I've known her for quite a while -- since a brief spell working on the German economy in the 1990s for an investment bank. She, like many other foreign correspondents, has been sent to Ireland to see what is going on here.

After a while, I wondered why she hadn't asked me anything about the Government, or the prospect of an election or what new political constellation might emerge here. She joked and in an exaggerated German accent laughed: "David, it doesn't matter who your next prime minister is, he will have no power -- we own you now, and he will do what we tell him."

The problem is that the joke is on us. She touched on the nub of the issue: the Irish elite is prepared to sell the sovereignty of this country to protect the likes of Roman Abramovich and other vulture investors who bought up third-rate Irish banking debt at a discount and are hoping to get paid in full.

In the world of debt, these people are referred to as 'rogue creditors'. Typically, they are treated as rogues. They are nothing to us and should be treated as nothing. As the clever economist Karl Whelan observed, if we are happy that our tax is used to pay Frank Lampard's wages, then that's more of a reflection on us.

People such as Abramovich, like the other creditors, can be told to line up in an orderly queue and wait for the liquidator to give them the morsels that might remain from the broken Irish banking system. The crud Abramovich owns -- an IOU from Irish Nationwide Building Society (INBS) -- is not the same thing as Irish government debt.

The last time I checked there was a harp on the front of my passport, not a picture of Michael Fingleton.

Any political party that fights the election on that premise of protecting the Irish taxpayer from vulture investors will get my vote. Not only will that party be doing the right thing, but it will begin the process of giving back to the people the country that we built. This country and our future income needs to be ripped from the grip of the 'political elite' (a group the governor of the Central Bank identified the other day) who are selling us to the lowest, not highest, bidder.

My German friend was amazed when she saw Abramovich's caper and she observed that the Irish parliament kept genuflecting to some crowd called bondholders. She asked me one of the most insightful questions I have heard throughout this long saga: "Do you Irish need to be loved so much that you will stand up for nothing?"

With Germanic precision and with the benefit of distance, she touched a nerve. The Irish weakness for not causing any trouble (bar a few theatrically drunken songs for the audience late at night) has led us to a situation where we are embarrassed to admit that we messed up. We don't want to stand out. We don't want to draw attention to ourselves for serious reasons. Is it because we want to impress the foreigner and above all make life easy for him?

Is it fair to say that over the years the language of resistance has been replaced by the language of compliance?

What is clear is that some countries fight, some make nuisances of themselves, but the default position of Ireland, or at least the Irish elite, is to comply -- no matter what the cost.

So take the example of euro membership. Denmark and Sweden -- two great European countries whose bona fides as EU members was never in doubt -- decided to keep their own currencies because they were perfectly happy with them and the euro's case wasn't compelling enough.

Meanwhile, what did our elite do? They went along for the ride -- one which the evidence would suggest was an extremely ill-advised ride. Ireland had much greater cause for concern about joining the euro, but we hardly made a noise. Why?

Could it be -- to follow my German friend's line of enquiry -- that we didn't have the self-confidence to stand on our own two feet and do some hard analysis about the consequences of this currency or any other decision?

Did we just want to be a mute member of the club -- unlike the pesky Danes, Swedes or, God forbid, Brits?

It is difficult to answer these questions. They are fraught and can lead to lots of heat and sometimes not too much light, but you don't have to be a conspiracy theorist to see a pattern.

Take, for example, Abramovich owning a huge amount of INBS debt. How did he get his hands on it? Who sold it to him? Would it be too much to conclude that whoever -- whichever broker -- sold the debt to him, also sold it to some other mega-rich clients elsewhere?

That would stand to reason. If so, could it be that the mega-rich who are closer to home find themselves in the same position as Abramovich?

Could it be that the only people benefiting from the Government's blind rush to impale the small guy with the debts of Fingleton et al are our own "high net worth" individuals? Could they be pulling the strings?

In all this haze, allegation and counter-allegation, can the "cui bono" question help us at all?

A clear domestic banking resolution law would clear all this up. But we have no such law. So the people are left in the lurch wondering who to believe.

We do know that, for example, the EU Commission gave its opinion on Friday at the wind-up of a Danish bank where it enthusiastically supported the principle of burden sharing.

Here's the quotation from the EU Commission regarding bust Danish banks: "Moreover, burden sharing is ensured by excluding shareholders and subordinated debt holders of the failed bank from any benefit from the aid."

There you have it in black and white. This is what the EU has advised Denmark to do. It clearly states that they won't give any state money to the troubled bank until the subordinated debt holders are burnt.

So let's get back to my German friend's observation: is it because we need to be loved or are we protecting someone big?

The EU says burn them and move on. Logic says don't sacrifice your sovereignty to bail out the hyper-rich, democracy says it is unfair to penalise the poor for the mistakes of the rich. What do you think?

I'll write more tomorrow. Gotta sleep now.

old_aussie

I think the first step would be to get out of the EU

Brown Bomber

yekahs wrote: »

Elite are selling our sovereignty to protect Anglo & Irish Nationwide bondholders

This is an article by David McWilliams about a conspiracy that is happening right now about how our government is handing over our sovereignty to the mega rich elite. Please read it. I fully agree with all he has written in this article. The thing that sickens me most is, I don't even know what to do about it! :mad:

That was a good article but the thing is I could've told you all that years ago from information from CT sites. I was in a position to buy a house without a mortage back then but I chose not to based on information basically since the fall of Bear Stearns. Saved myself a fortune. People couldn't understand how renting wasn't "dead money" and what drove me crazy was that intelligent people I knew were buying houses on the assumption "ah shure buy now while the house prices are low, bargain! Guaranteed to go back up" many of these people have families now and there mortage is greater than the value of their home. I remember it clearly, the media and our politicians where all in denial about the global crash and its implications which meant automatically that the herds of "free thinking" sheep thought so too. Now that I think of it I remember mentioning the possibility here under a different name of the IMF having to be called into Ireland, and it was scoffed at.

gizmo

To be honest I agree with everything in the article bar one point. To be the best of my knowledge, Lenihan has stated quite clearly that subordinated bondholders of INBS should make a “significant contribution toward meeting the costs” of a planned government bailout. This has clearly rattled some cages and as a result, has had to state that they will meet any potential legal action head on. This to me is the very definition of not bending over.

On a side note, while I always respected McWilliams I'm still disgusted over his leaking of the meeting with Lenihan at his home. I think most of us were crying out for the government to consider the advice of more renowned economists and then when he finally did it, McWilliams used the incidence to push his book with all the grace of a tabloid expose. It was sickening to see and while it certainly hasn't shaken my confidence in him professionally, I do take some of what he says with a grain of salt unfortunately.

As for leaving the EU, that would be insane. The most severe course of action hinted at by McWilliams and co has been ditching the Euro but anyone who looks at the funding we have gotten from the EU over the last number of years will see quite clearly why it is in our best interests to stay.

With regards buying properties in the last couple of years Brown Bomber, I agree with you at the lunacy of people considering rent "dead money". While it was, to all intents and purposes, literally going nowhere but to pay for accommodation from month to month, at least it was better than the alternative of being wrapped up in debt for the foreseeable future. As for it being a CT of sorts, I'm not sure I agree. I think it was more that people got so caught up in this whole "Celtic Tiger" nonsense and that they lost the run of themselves completely. They finally had money and the idea of saving it for a rainy day was forgotten about. Anyone who listened to a variety of economists or even had a mediocre grasp of history of course, knew that these bubbles don't last forever, the information was there but people were just too blinded by their new found wealth or, to be more precise, their approximation of wealth, to see it.

uprising2

yekahs wrote: »

Elite are selling our sovereignty to protect Anglo & Irish Nationwide bondholders

This is an article by David McWilliams about a conspiracy that is happening right now about how our government is handing over our sovereignty to the mega rich elite. Please read it. I fully agree with all he has written in this article. The thing that sickens me most is, I don't even know what to do about it! :mad:
.

Man its time we got our sh1t together and get organised, whats the chances of a peoples revolution, garda and army on board, and take it back, tell these elites to FUKK OFF.
Restore the law of the land, keep whats inherently ours, I've been saying this for years, the global recession was planned to manipulate economies, they got our economy, bought it new clothes, the govt were never really to "thank" for the "good days", it was planned, the puppet at the wheel done a jump out and took to his toes, and is now sticking his head out of a press on a tv ad, while the rug is pulled from beneath us all.
This is when we'll see the small print of these treaties come into play.
I say..
Get Up
Stand UP

Shakey your new friends had a hand in it, the funny handshake boys.

And these snakey bastards
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Bilderberg_participants#Ireland

Ireland

• Garret FitzGerald, former Taoiseach [78]
• Michael McDowell, former Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform [9]
• Peter Sutherland, Director General of the WTO and former Attorney General of Ireland [1]

meglome

I agree we should tell the bond holders where to go.

old_aussie wrote: »

I think the first step would be to get out of the EU

In a word... mental. The EU has done wonders for this country. The fact that we, as in us, screwed it up is not their fault.

I wonder how many people on here right now didn't vote and all the while saying 'sure they're all the same'. How did that work out I wonder.



And Uprising I read most of the Lisbon treaty so you needn't worry about those jack booted fascists coming over the hills just yet.

Mahatma coat

I was wonderin about how to fix, or at lest aleviate the burden on the Exchequer

How about Re issuing the Punt as a domestic currency??

Did anyone else get 'Bonus Bonds' as a pay incentive during the Boom times???

How about somekind of system like that, where The Country rund a dual currency Euro for Savings and International Transactions and Food Drink etc, theProducts of the Domestic Market are purchasable with Punts, we coud offer ridiculous exchange rates to attract Tourists in, but give Really Really Crappy Rates to stop Money leving, then The ECBwould have their little Stranglehold over Our participation inthe CommonMarket and we would have some form of Fiscal independence over our own currency.

Wouldnt be all that complicated, people would get used to it again, and hey we already have converter calculators and Coin machines that handle both currencies

Yitzhak Rabin

gizmo wrote: »

To be honest I agree with everything in the article bar one point. To be the best of my knowledge, Lenihan has stated quite clearly that subordinated bondholders of INBS should make a “significant contribution toward meeting the costs” of a planned government bailout. This has clearly rattled some cages and as a result, has had to state that they will meet any potential legal action head on. This to me is the very definition of not bending over.

I wouldn't put any stock in "this is the cheapest bailout in history" Lenihan at all to be honest. He has backtracked on his words on so many occasions at this stage, that you can't trust him to follow through on anything he says.

On a side note, while I always respected McWilliams I'm still disgusted over his leaking of the meeting with Lenihan at his home. I think most of us were crying out for the government to consider the advice of more renowned economists and then when he finally did it, McWilliams used the incidence to push his book with all the grace of a tabloid expose. It was sickening to see and while it certainly hasn't shaken my confidence in him professionally, I do take some of what he says with a grain of salt unfortunately.

Agree 100%

As for leaving the EU, that would be insane. The most severe course of action hinted at by McWilliams and co has been ditching the Euro but anyone who looks at the funding we have gotten from the EU over the last number of years will see quite clearly why it is in our best interests to stay.

I agree as well. I don't ever seeing us leave the EU. What I do see is Angela Merkel saying. "Right, ve haf had enough. Bye Bye" without them and France, we would have no choice but to leave. I think that the only alternative to the euro eventually breaking up, is if it becomes a proper single currency that involves the EU managing fiscal matters and taxation completely. A single currency doesn't work without this. Obviously that is something I would not be in favour of. Although it may happen by proxy, if the EU have to bail us out alá Greece.

I think it was more that people got so caught up in this whole "Celtic Tiger" nonsense and that they lost the run of themselves completely. They finally had money and the idea of saving it for a rainy day was forgotten about. Anyone who listened to a variety of economists or even had a mediocre grasp of history of course, knew that these bubbles don't last forever, the information was there but people were just too blinded by their new found wealth or, to be more precise, their approximation of wealth, to see it.

I agree with you that the bubble itself, was mostly not a CT (apart from those that should have, and did in fact know better, but for their own selfish gains pumped up the market and bailed just before the collapse. Its a well known wall street fraud technique called 'pump and dump'. A guy called Jordan Belfort was a famous wall street trader who did it. He would talk up a certain share into a frenzy, and then would dump his shares before the crash. Exactly like a certain few in the Irish property market did.

However, the CT I am proposing is that Lenihan and Co. know that guarenteeing the bondholders sub-ordinated debt is not in the best interest of the state. He knows that he is basically taking money from tax payers and giving it to mega tycoons like Roman Abramovich for the risks they took. The reason he is doing it, is unknown to me, but the end result will be a loss in sovereignty on fiscal matters.

gizmo

yekahs wrote: »

I wouldn't put any stock in "this is the cheapest bailout in history" Lenihan at all to be honest. He has backtracked on his words on so many occasions at this stage, that you can't trust him to follow through on anything he says.

...

However, the CT I am proposing is that Lenihan and Co. know that guarenteeing the bondholders sub-ordinated debt is not in the best interest of the state. He knows that he is basically taking money from tax payers and giving it to mega tycoons like Roman Abramovich for the risks they took. The reason he is doing it, is unknown to me, but the end result will be a loss in sovereignty on fiscal matters.

Both of these points are based on a distrust of Lenihan, one which I do not share unfortunately. While I have zero confidence in Cowen and many cabinet ministers, Lenihan is one of the few in power whom I actually do trust. He is, of course, in an unenviable position and will possibly make mistakes but I don't think at any point he set out to purposely mislead people. Play down some issues in order to avoid panic perhaps, but certainly not do so maliciously.

As for how to fix it well one thing is for certain, taking to the streets in violent protests is certainly not the way to do it. People are free to protest peacefully if they want to force another election but at the same time, who would replace them? Do you think FG or Labour would do a better job? Richard Bruton is one of the few I would have confidence in within FG and I wouldn't trust Labour in the slightest. What confuses me even more is FGs refusal to adopt another Tallaght Strategy which would be of clear benefit to the nation. What they seem to be doing instead is waiting for the December Budget and then pouncing on it in what will be obvious to most, a horrible example of political opportunism.

clived2

You can laugh if you want, but only one thing
happens when you outsource debt,

We will never be able to pay off interest on loans
The system is designed that way

What will happen? The clue is in the video

Yitzhak Rabin

gizmo wrote: »

Both of these points are based on a distrust of Lenihan, one which I do not share unfortunately. While I have zero confidence in Cowen and many cabinet ministers, Lenihan is one of the few in power whom I actually do trust. He is, of course, in an unenviable position and will possibly make mistakes but I don't think at any point he set out to purposely mislead people. Play down some issues in order to avoid panic perhaps, but certainly not do so maliciously.

Its based on the limited information that Lenihan will digress about Anglo. He is hiding the accounts of Anglo from the people and is showing absolutely no transparency on the issue. When someone takes woeful decisions, and won't give us the information on why they made those crazy decisions, then you'll have to excuse my cynicism when I won't trust that person.

He is constantly misleading people. He is playing on people's ignorance in understanding of the finacial markets in order to manipulate them. He is using the issue of sovereign government bonds, and the Anglo Irish bonds interchangeably. He is not a fool. He knows that the private bonds of Anglo, are not the same as the sovereign bonds issued by the country, yet he claims if we default on the Anglo bonds(which people understood when they bought them that there was risk involved) that it would be equivalent to a sovereign debt default. That is absolute nonsense.

So then why is he protecting these mega-rich international investors? Perhaps he is innocently manipulated by the likes of Peter Sutherland not to let the bondholders of Anglo burn, but I doubt it, I'd say he knows damn well that he doesn't have to protect them. I'd say he is doing it, because he is part of that scumbag elite who got us here, him being a 3rd generation political dynasty.

Why didn't he just let Anglo fail? If it failed it would have been wound up, the assets sold at whatever value the market would place on them (possibly higher than nama valuations) and the other banks would suffer as, we are told, would "Ireland's reputational value". However, any damage to our reputation would be long since gone because a bank defaulting during a massive world crisis is no big thing.

The other thing that would have happened is that there would have been some transparency as to what exactly Anglo were up to, and all their dodgy loans would be out on the street.

The reason he saved it, is his crony banker friends asked him to. He sold this country out and is a scumbag and a traitor. Why people think he is 'one of the decent ones' is beyond me. I wouldn't have minded if he just guarantee the depositors, that would be fine. The depositors only made up 6 Bn....saving Anglo has cost us almost 6 times that! How anyone can justify that amount of money to save saudi princes and russian oil tycoons is lunacy.

There is no logical, fair and transparent reason why this cesspit was given unconditional life support. The only conclusion you can draw is that Lenihan is at worst a scumbag, and at best a moron.

As for how to fix it well one thing is for certain, taking to the streets in violent protests is certainly not the way to do it. People are free to protest peacefully if they want to force another election but at the same time, who would replace them? Do you think FG or Labour would do a better job? Richard Bruton is one of the few I would have confidence in within FG and I wouldn't trust Labour in the slightest. What confuses me even more is FGs refusal to adopt another Tallaght Strategy which would be of clear benefit to the nation. What they seem to be doing instead is waiting for the December Budget and then pouncing on it in what will be obvious to most, a horrible example of political opportunism.

I won't respond to this bit, purely, because I want to focus on the CT aspect of this, rather than the politics of it, but I agree mostly with you, and also disagree with some of what you said.

Yitzhak Rabin

clived2 wrote: »

What will happen? The clue is in the video

We're all going to dance, play soccer, marry Shakira and live happily ever after.... Yipeeeeeee!

clived2

yekahs wrote: »

We're all going to dance, play soccer, marry Shakira and live happily ever after.... Yipeeeeeee!

Dont be stupid








We cant all marry Shakira

professore

yekahs wrote: »

I agree as well. I don't ever seeing us leave the EU. What I do see is Angela Merkel saying. "Right, ve haf had enough. Bye Bye" without them and France, we would have no choice but to leave. I think that the only alternative to the euro eventually breaking up, is if it becomes a proper single currency that involves the EU managing fiscal matters and taxation completely. A single currency doesn't work without this. Obviously that is something I would not be in favour of. Although it may happen by proxy, if the EU have to bail us out alá Greece.

I agree with everything except the line on taxes. It works in the US - you have federal and state taxes. Here a certain % of VAT receipts goes to the EU.

professore

clived2 wrote: »

Dont be stupid








We cant all marry Shakira

Yeah she's a babe but man that droning singing would get old very fast !!!!

Yitzhak Rabin

professore wrote: »

I agree with everything except the line on taxes. It works in the US - you have federal and state taxes. Here a certain % of VAT receipts goes to the EU.

You're right, sorry. Although, the US taxation system is far more integrated than the mish-mash here in the EU.

What would have been more accurate for me to say is that, for us to have a optimal currency area (OCA) one of the things that is required, that we have an integrated fiscal and taxation system.

bonkey

professore wrote: »

I agree with everything except the line on taxes. It works in the US - you have federal and state taxes. Here a certain % of VAT receipts goes to the EU.

Here in Switzerland, taxes are set and paid at a "Gemeinde" level - roughly equivalent to a townland.
The canton (county) also defines a tax rate, which it receives "up" from the Gemeinde,
The state also defines a tax-rate, which it again receives "up" the line.

There's additional complexity, in that there is a degree of balancing whereby richer cantons contribute to poorer cantons.

From that perspective, while i'd probably agree that a unified taxation system requires (or greatly benefits from) a single currency, it is not the case that a 'proper' single currency requires a centrally managed taxation system. A structured tiered system with clearly-defined boundaries of responsibility works just fine.

clived2

professore wrote: »

Yeah she's a babe but man that droning singing would get old very fast !!!!

em....

fontanalis

old_aussie wrote: »

I think the first step would be to get out of the EU

Of course, the EU made Ireland be obsessed with property and borrowing. What value do you think the punt would have if Ireland left?

deelite

fontanalis wrote: »

Of course, the EU made Ireland be obsessed with property and borrowing. What value do you think the punt would have if Ireland left?

62 pence

iPlop

So it's obvious that it doesn't matter who is elected ,someone else is pulling the strings.

digme

Exactly.

gizmo

yekahs wrote: »

Why didn't he just let Anglo fail? If it failed it would have been wound up, the assets sold at whatever value the market would place on them (possibly higher than nama valuations) and the other banks would suffer as, we are told, would "Ireland's reputational value". However, any damage to our reputation would be long since gone because a bank defaulting during a massive world crisis is no big thing.

I suggest you go back to the thread you read that in and take the advice of the people who seem to know what they're talking about. The reasons Anglo could not have been allowed to fail were made perfectly clear on that thread and there is no CT about it.

That being said, what I'll happily admit to is the level of information which is being supplied to the media or, to be more precise, the lack thereof. The reason for this, however, is simple. If Lenihan were to talk in precise terms regarding what has happened and what needs to be done he would leave much of the viewers looking like this . On the other hand, this is actually quite similar to what happened during Lisbon, the government did not give any information out the first time around which allowed a ton of misinformation to spread thus clouding the issue entirely. A far better solution given the nature of the economic situation would be to supply people with some form of fact sheet or site which can be consulted for more easy to digest information so people can understand the issues without needing to fully understand the economics behind it.

The rest of you post is full of misinformation and ignorant bull**** and to be honest I'm a mix of surprised and disappointed given the high calibre of your previous posts.

chelseavera

yekahs wrote: »

Elite are selling our sovereignty to protect Anglo & Irish Nationwide bondholders

This is an article by David McWilliams about a conspiracy that is happening right now about how our government is handing over our sovereignty to the mega rich elite. Please read it. I fully agree with all he has written in this article. The thing that sickens me most is, I don't even know what to do about it! :mad:



I'll write more tomorrow. Gotta sleep now.

An Anti-Chelsea thread. Go away!!

Slick50

clived2 wrote: »

What will happen? The clue is in the video

Ireland gets screwed, and everybody else goes to Africa to play football, party and have a good time?

orourkeda

I'm not very well informed on the issue of bonds etc and am very much open to correction but do those who dabble in bonds almost resign themselves to the fact that they are likely to lose all or most of their money or is it realistic for them to presume a return on their investment? Does it depend on the amount of the type of bond?

Are the irish government entitled to tell the bondholders to go f*ck themselves.

Mahatma coat

gizmo wrote: »

I suggest you go back to the thread you read that in and take the advice of the people who seem to know what they're talking about. The reasons Anglo could not have been allowed to fail were made perfectly clear on that thread and there is no CT about it.

See the CT Community doesnt on a whole share your faith thatthese people Know what they're talkin about, I'll concede that they have a fine Line in Bullsh!t, but whether or not they Know any more thanthe average joe is debateable

That being said, what I'll happily admit to is the level of information which is being supplied to the media or, to be more precise, the lack thereof. The reason for this, however, is simple. If Lenihan were to talk in precise terms regarding what has happened and what needs to be done he would leave much of the viewers looking like this . On the other hand, this is actually quite similar to what happened during Lisbon, the government did not give any information out the first time around which allowed a ton of misinformation to spread thus clouding the issue entirely. A far better solution given the nature of the economic situation would be to supply people with some form of fact sheet or site which can be consulted for more easy to digest information so people can understand the issues without needing to fully understand the economics behind it.

Hows about you write up a draught of this FactSheet then?

........<snip>.

gizmo

Mahatma coat wrote: »

See the CT Community doesnt on a whole share your faith thatthese people Know what they're talkin about, I'll concede that they have a fine Line in Bullsh!t, but whether or not they Know any more thanthe average joe is debateable

To whom are you referring, the government? I'd certainly agree that many cabinet ministers probably don't know little more than the average joe, they aren't usually made Minister for Finance though.

Mahatma coat wrote: »

Hows about you write up a draught of this FactSheet then?

I'll happily admit I'm not the right person to do it. What is required is someone with the proper knowledge but also the ability to distill said information down to a level where it can be understood by everyone. It's not easy to find someone who can do that, at a more basic level I'm sure we've all had teachers or lecturers who were quite clearly fantastic in their field but lacked the ability to get the point across in a simple way. They do exist though and they would certainly be the people best equipped to handle this matter.

sligopark

gizmo wrote: »

To be honest I agree with everything in the article bar one point. To be the best of my knowledge, Lenihan has stated quite clearly that subordinated bondholders of INBS should make a “significant contribution toward meeting the costs” of a planned government bailout. This has clearly rattled some cages and as a result, has had to state that they will meet any potential legal action head on. This to me is the very definition of not bending over.

I think a €50billion bank bailout is pretty much the definition of bending over.

The country has been robbed by treasonous politicians, banksters, and a EU/World wide elite.

Cash has been removed from our society - why?

uprising2 wrote: »

Bilerberg Ireland
· Peter Sutherland, Director General of the WTO and former Attorney General of Ireland [1]

(Hope you don't mind the modified quote Uprising2)

Isn't Peter Sutherland the latest economic hero being rolled out by politicians (FF and FG) and the media? I heard on the radio a suggestion that be co-voted by the cabinet to sit in on their meetings and be allowed speak and direct discussion.

My immediate gut reaction was - wtf???

meglome wrote: »

The EU has done wonders for this country.

eh no they haven't - we paid for their money -with our fisheries - remember?

Our country is now in sh1te thanks to the EU - small farmholds gone, fishing gone, sovereign currency gone, cash gone....

Waaake up

meglome wrote: »

And Uprising I read most of the Lisbon treaty

I would hate to call anyone a liar but I doubt it... and the jack boot fascists? They dressed up in suits these days

Why was the Lisbon treaty forced upon us?

yekahs wrote: »

However, the CT I am proposing is that Lenihan and Co. know that guarenteeing the bondholders sub-ordinated debt is not in the best interest of the state. He knows that he is basically taking money from tax payers and giving it to mega tycoons like Roman Abramovich for the risks they took. The reason he is doing it, is unknown to me, but the end result will be a loss in sovereignty on fiscal matters.

Although we don't see eye to eye yekahs on most things - here I am 100% behind this and your OP quoting McWilliams

gizmo wrote: »

Both of these points are based on a distrust of Lenihan, one which I do not share unfortunately.

Like and trust or two entirely different things - I like him, I admire him working through his illness, I think he is in over his head, has taken bad advice, can't see the wood for the trees, has sold out the country and should be tried for treason.

gizmo wrote: »

As for how to fix it well one thing is for certain, taking to the streets in violent protests is certainly not the way to do it.

Agreed - wasn't blackiebeast talking up a peaceful yet promising protest strategy?

gizmo wrote: »

Do you think FG or Labour would do a better job? Richard Bruton is one of the few I would have confidence in within FG and I wouldn't trust Labour in the slightest.

Bruton - another elitist in the bilderberg fashion - and both FG and labour monkeys sold us out to the EU..

New politics are needed from the ground up.

Love him or hate him this guy talked a lot of sense in hindsight

http://jrnl.ie/30788

bonkey wrote: »

From that perspective, while i'd probably agree that a unified taxation system requires (or greatly benefits from) a single currency, it is not the case that a 'proper' single currency requires a centrally managed taxation system. A structured tiered system with clearly-defined boundaries of responsibility works just fine.

That’s all we need - EU taxes too








But hey that’s coming too folks …

Septic Leper wrote: »

So it's obvious that it doesn't matter who is elected ,someone else is pulling the strings.

digme wrote: »

Exactly.

Exactly Yekahs point - who is in charge and pulling the traitor lenihan's strings?

meglome

sligopark wrote: »

eh no they haven't - we paid for their money -with our fisheries - remember?

Nope I don't remember that as that didn't happen. I believe the figure that went around was €200 billion. The problem with this figure is someone made it up, just like figure that's on those oil stickers all over Dublin.

The real figures are here, all €4.5 billion of it. Plus the EU have given us the best part of €45 billion since we joined.

sligopark wrote: »

Our country is now in sh1te thanks to the EU - small farmholds gone, fishing gone, sovereign currency gone, cash gone....

You have heard of CAP right? where the EU pays our farmers? The EU put quotas on our fishing as we've overfished and stocks are down, very sensible thing to do. Without the Euro we'd be bankrupt with the shít we're in. And last I looked, a few hours ago, cash was very much still around.

sligopark wrote: »

Waaake up

So is making stuff up supposed to wake me up?

sligopark wrote: »

I would hate to call anyone a liar but I doubt it... and the jack boot fascists? They dressed up in suits these days

Well you're entitled to your opinion. I got involved in supporting the Lisbon treaty on boards.ie so i read a lot of the condensed version. I started out by looking up the bad things people told me were in it. The funny thing was all the bad stuff I was told about it turned out to be not true. A lot of lairs about when it came to the Lisbon treaty.

sligopark wrote: »

Why was the Lisbon treaty forced upon us?

I seem to recall voting on it and voting exactly as I wanted, a bit confused as to where the forcing came in. With the expansion of the EU reform was needed and the Lisbon treaty brought that in.

sligopark

meglome wrote: »

I believe the figure that went around was €200 billion. The problem with this figure is someone made it up, just like figure that's on those oil stickers all over Dublin.

The real figures are here, all €4.5 billion of it. Plus the EU have given us the best part of €45 billion since we joined.

just like your made up figures - the fact is fishing rights as per sovereinty was given away - FOREVER - not heard of all the other countries raping our fishing waters including Iceland?

meglome wrote: »

[You have heard of CAP right? where the EU pays our farmers?

like everyone else I have noticed the depletion of small farmholds as happened in Germany when I lived there - and the creation of 'factory Ireland'

why haven't you?

meglome wrote: »

And last I looked, a few hours ago, cash was very much still around.

where have you seen that cos its low on the ground where my business is?

meglome wrote: »

So is making stuff up supposed to wake me up?

where do you live - on the moon?

meglome wrote: »

Well you're entitled to your opinion.

thank you

meglome wrote: »

I got involved in supporting the Lisbon treaty on boards.ie so i read a lot of the condensed version.

and so never read it...

meglome wrote: »

The funny thing was all the bad stuff I was told about it turned out to be not true. A lot of lairs about when it came to the Lisbon treaty.

pity you like many others believed the liars - where are the jobs Bud?

Give me a break

Get a column in a daily paper and get some sort of eu sponsorship ala peter sutherland - the vast majority of people realise they were sold a pup with the lisbon traitorship deal ... stop it please



Back to the OP

who is pulling the traitor lenihan's strings?