= new reply since forum marked as read
you're still waiting for the cuts?
"An unfortunate choice of words"
Still, keep me posted on the past speculation and if you come across any cuts.
It's better than a link to a Ron Paul post. 
For not using the 
icon. When you label it, you neuter it.
I vehemently disagree with Manny and sometimes I want to wring his neck, but I like him. He's persistent and believes what he's saying. Over and over. Never gives up. He makes me smile -- I can't help it.
we were told daily and unapologetically that we alone were legally and morally responsible for our conduct, even if following a direct order and that if we had any concern or qualms about an order to call "Compliance" at XXX-XXX-xxxx. Failing to do so, we were accepting civil and criminal responsibility for our actions. Note that "Compliance" is transparent to regulators.
Note that I am no longer a banker. I'm also fully in support of "
penalizing) the 100s of thousands of employees involved in the robosigning debacle just for following orders." Nobody reaches those levels in the bank or is allowed to do that job without the licenses, training and certifications to know what they should and should not be doing or signing.
I was only following orders has never been an acceptable defense in anything.
"Nobody reaches those levels in the bank or is allowed to do that job without the licenses, training and certifications to know what they should and should not be doing or signing. "
That doesn't sound like any of the definitions of "peon", either literal or metaphorical, that I've ever heard.
If the robosigners were all required to be licensed, trained & certified... then there is a legal expectation that they know what the fuck they're doing. If they decide, under duress or just for the sake of convenience, to circumvent the legal (not to mention ethical) expectations of their training and certification... then they ought to be held responsible.
If they ARE held responsible... then no trained & certified professionals will be inclined to side-step all of the ethical considerations of their training and certification process. If NOT, then they, like the Wall St. types, will be inclined to ignore ethical constraints that are "just for show" and paperwork.
It's kind of the same thing as the holding responsible of those who ordered torture... those who performed it (like those who enforced the evictions robo-signed) can be considered "peon"s in the sense that they're enforcing the rules in the "fields"/streets... but those who signed into effect those orders have to take responsibility, as certified competent signers-into-effect, for what they signed.
Let the banks train monkeys or guinea pigs to sign the signing statements if they're worried about what a signer might say under duress from the DOJ ("Row. Row. Row."
, or if they want to be able to claim that no one is ultimately responsible for statements being signed...
These kids today.
*tee hee hee*
In church they told me to turn the other cheek, my Mom told me that's right Baby, but you better damn well remember you only have one other cheek to turn, after that you let them have it with both barrels. 
You can sure tell who just reads the subject line as opposed to the whole post 
Also, penalizing these job creators just out of spite will just hurt us all in the end.
If we hurt them, we'll break the flow of the trickle down.
LOVE YA!!!
