Guns and Butter - "9/11 Let's Get Empirical"

[seemslikeadream]

http://www.kpfa.org/archive/id/48168


"9/11 Let's Get Empirical" excerpts from a film featuring David Ray Griffin, an examination of the evidence, and a refutation of critics of independent research into the events of September 11th.







http://www.kpfa.org/archive/id/47346

Guns and Butter - "9/11 and Nationalist Faith" with Dr. David Ray Griffin

Guns and Butter - "9/11 and Nationalist Faith" with Dr. David Ray Griffin
"9/11 and Nationalist Faith" with Dr. David Ray Griffin who shows that the greatest obstacle to seeing the truth - that 9/11 was an inside job - is not the lack of evidence, but what can be called "nationalist faith" - the belief that America is the "exceptional nation", whose leaders never deliberately do anything truly evil, at least to their own citizens.

[Bolo Boffin]

1. Jesus God.

The gouging out of eardrums will be followed by a passing of the collection for DRG's retirement fund. All hail the mighty prophet, DRG!

ETA: 9/11 Truth is the flip side of American exceptionalism.

[seemslikeadream]

2. In my opinion these are the real terrorists

[Bolo Boffin]

3. Maybe you could get The Holy 9/11 Apostle Griffin pointed in the right direction, then. n/t

[seemslikeadream]

4. Well if none of those guys gets jail time...............

there could be a part to play. Get back with me when ANY of that scum ends up at the grey bar hotel.





or Stanford is outed as CIA, which ever comes first

[Bolo Boffin]

5. OK, I'll bite.

Stanford CIA. Got links?

[seemslikeadream]

6. Why would some one tell SEC to back of Stanford?

I just read a minute ago that there ain't no 8 billion in that bank in Antigua, he was hanging out in Venezuela probably checkin out Hugo. I'll find the links later, they're all in GD.








http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=102x3751714


Is Allen Stanford An Asset Of The CIA?
http://www.businessinsider.com/is-allen-stanford-a-cia-asset-2009-2


SEC Was Told To Back Off Stanford In 2006
http://www.businessinsider.com/sec-was-told-to-back-off-stanford-in-2006-2009-2

Allen Stanford Forfeited $3 Million In Drug Money In 1999
http://www.businessinsider.com/allen-stanford-forced-to-forfeit-3-million-in-drug-money-in-1999-2009-2


Surprise: Stanford Under Federal Drug Investigation
http://www.businessinsider.com/shocker-stanford-under-federal-drug-investigation-2009-2

Venezuela Seizes Control Of Stanford Bank
http://uk.news.yahoo.com/5/20090219/twl-venezuela-seizes-control-of-stanford-3fd0ae9_3.html

As Others Fled Venezuela, Stanford Saw a Chance
http://www.nytimes.com/2009/02/19/business/worldbusiness/19invest.html?_r=2



http://kucinich.house.gov/News/DocumentSingle.aspx?DocumentID=112160


Kucinich: Who Told SEC to "Stand Down" on Stanford Probe?
Chairman of Domestic Policy Subcommittee Opens Inquiry

Rep. Dennis Kucinich


Washington, Feb 20 -

Chairman of the Domestic Policy Subcommittee, Congressman Dennis Kucinich (D-OH) today sent a letter to Ms. Mary Schapiro, Chair of the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) requesting documents that could reveal which government agency told the SEC to "stand down" rather than take enforcement action against the Stanford Group in October 2006 as has been reported by the New York Times.

Recent media reports have indicated that the SEC was aware of improprieties at Stanford Financial Group as early as October 2006, but withheld action at the request of another government agency.

In a report published in the February 17th edition of the New York Times, an SEC official said that an inquiry had been opened on Stanford in October of 2006. According to the Times report, an associate regional director of enforcement said the SEC "stood down" on its investigation as a result of the intervention of another federal agency.

Stanford is now the focus of an $8 billion fraud investigation and, presumably, an earlier inquiry would have spared many Stanford investors and triggered similar inquiries into other funds which lacked transparency.

"The SEC's recent filing against Stanford stemmed from the 2006 SEC inquiry that had been apparently shelved at the request of the unnamed agency. If this is true, we must find out why the SEC delayed enforcement, and if there were other cases where other government agencies intervened to block enforcement,” Chairman Kucinich said.

"If the SEC did indeed begin an inquiry in 2006 and was called off by another agency, our subcommittee will demand that the SEC reveal the name of that agency which told it not to enforce federal laws which protect investors," said Chairman Kucinich.

The full text of the letter follows:

February 20, 2009

Ms. Mary Schapiro
Chair
U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission
100 F Street, NE
Washington, DC 20549

Dear Ms. Schapiro:

The Domestic Policy Subcommittee, House Oversight and Government Reform Committee is pleased that the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) has initiated an enforcement action against Robert Allen Stanford; however the Subcommittee remains concerned about the substantial delay in the Commission’s action. Recent published news reports assert that as early as 2006, the SEC suspended its investigation of Stanford Group under pressure from another unidentified federal agency.1

This assertion raises serious questions about the Commission’s dedication to its mission of protecting investors. The Subcommittee is interested in learning why the SEC suspended in 2006 its investigation of Mr. Stanford’s financial dealings, as well as any role that other federal agencies may have had in that decision.

In order to assist the Subcommittee with its inquiry, I request the following:

(1) All documents pertaining to “Robert Allen Stanford;” Stanford Financial Group and all subsidiaries; including all documents where abovementioned entities may have been referred to by alternate names or identifications; and

(2) All documents received by the SEC from any other federal agency, as well as all documents sent by the SEC to any other federal agency, that pertain to any of the entities covered in (1), between 2006 and the present date.

The Oversight and Government Reform Committee is the principal oversight committee in the House of Representatives and has broad oversight jurisdiction as set forth in House Rule X including over the Securities and Exchange Commission. An attachment to this letter provides information on how to respond to the Subcommittee’s request.

We request that you provide these documents as soon as possible, but in no case later than 5:00 p.m. on Monday March 9, 2009.

Sincerely,

Dennis J. Kucinich
Chairman
Domestic Policy Subcommittee



cc: Jim Jordan
Ranking Minority Member

1 Krauss, C., Zweig, P., and Creswell, J. “Texas Firm Accused of $8 Billion Fraud.” New York Times. February 17, 2009.



http://uk.reuters.com/article/UKNews1/idUKTRE51J5BS20090220
Peru investigates Stanford for money laundering


LIMA (Reuters) - Peru has started an investigation to see if the local unit of Stanford Financial Group engaged in money laundering, the country's lead public prosecutor for such crimes said in an interview on Friday.

Jorge Luis Caldas told Reuters that Peru's investigation would also look into whether the company sold high-yield certificates of deposit without a licence.
The CDs are at the core of what U.S. authorities have called an $8 billion (5.5 billion pound) "massive" fraud allegedly carried out by Texas billionaire Allen Stanford and several of his companies.
Caldas disclosed the inquiry a day after Peru's securities regulator suspended the operations of the local Stanford office for 30 days.

"We are going to investigate to verify if, in effect, there was money laundering," Caldas said.

ABC News reported the U.S. FBI and other agencies have looked into whether Stanford was involved in laundering drug money from Mexico's drug cartel.
Peru is the world's No. 2 cocaine producer after Colombia, and officials say Colombian and Mexican cartels work in Peru.




FBI inquiry links Stanford to Mexican cocaine cartel
http://www.thisislondon.co.uk/standard/article-23646716-details/FBI+inquiry+links+Stanford+to+Mexican+cocaine+cartel/article.do


Past probes sought to tie Stanford to drugs,
http://www.chron.com/disp/story.mpl/business/6273823.html



As investigations into Stanford's businesses widened, evidence emerged that his Stanford Group Co had been disciplined by the Financial Industry Regulatory Authority (FINRA). the U.S. broker-dealer watchdog.


In November 2007, FINRA fined Stanford Group $10,000 for misleading sales literature that failed to prominently disclose risks, such as that the CDs were not issued by a U.S. bank and were not insured by the Federal Deposit Insurance Corp.

http://www.reuters.com/article/topNews/idUSTRE51H5IO20090219?pageNumber=2&virtualBrandChannel=0

....
Stanford's personal fortune was estimated at $2.2 billion last year by Forbes Magazine.

http://www.reuters.com/article/topNews/idUSTRE51H5IO20090219?pageNumber=3&virtualBrandChannel=0

Schapiro's corrupt as Markopolos pointed out.

01:02:11 MARKOPOLOS

01:02:39 REP.SHERMAN

....
01:05:01 REP.CASTLE

01:05:36 MARKOPOLOS

http://www.c-spanarchives.org/library/index.php?main_page=product_video_info&products_id=283836-1

....
FBI Probes Stanford Ties to Mexico's Gulf Cartel

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=z5uFXD2E0rc


UPDATE 2-Stanford's whereabouts: again a mystery
http://in.reuters.com/article/marketsNewsUS/idINN2050006820090221

Judge Removes Self From Stanford SEC Fraud Lawsuit (Update1)

http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=20601087&sid=aPh3Ki6dBlao&refer=home



http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=washingtonstory&sid=aNOkyot5pWo4


No criminal charges have been filed against Stanford or his co-defendants in the SEC case: Stanford Chief Financial Officer James M. Davis and Laura Pendergest-Holt, chief investment officer of the Stanford Financial Group. Federal marshals shut the Houston office of Stanford Group Co.

“The SEC case is a precursor for the criminal investigation and inevitable criminal charges,” said Dan Cogdell, a Houston attorney who defended several Enron Corp. executives against federal securities-fraud charges.

Based on allegations in the SEC complaint, prosecutors might have grounds to charge some of the defendants with mail fraud, bank fraud, securities fraud, money laundering “and a host of less felonious acts,” he said.

Houston U.S. Attorney’s Office spokeswoman Angela Dodge referred questions regarding possible charges against Stanford to the SEC. Alfredo Perez, a spokesman for the U.S. Marshal’s office in Houston, said he wasn’t aware of any arrest warrants for the three executives, which he said wouldn’t be issued until any charges are filed.

[seemslikeadream]

7. and

Whistleblower Alleges $8 Billion Fraud At Sir Allen Stanford's Offshore Bank

http://www.businessinsider.com/whistleblower-alleges-8-billion-fraud-at-sir-allen-stanfords-offshore-bank-2009-2