Must reads from Carolyn Baker

Predatory Lenders' Partner in Crime by Eliot Spitzer

[The following article was published in The Washington Post the day after New York Gov. Eliot Spitzer allegedly engaged the services of a call girl at the Mayflower Hotel in Washington, DC. When one reads Spitzer's words, one can only wonder if he was targeted by the perpetrators he was investigating.--CB]

How the Bush administration stopped the states from stepping in to help consumers.

Several years ago, state attorneys general and others involved in consumer protection began to notice a marked increase in a range of predatory lending practices by mortgage lenders. Some were misrepresenting the terms of loans, making loans without regard to consumers' ability to repay, making loans with deceptive "teaser" rates that later ballooned astronomically, packing loans with undisclosed charges and fees, or even paying illegal kickbacks. These and other practices, we noticed, were having a devastating effect on home buyers. In addition, the widespread nature of these practices, if left unchecked, threatened our financial markets.

Even though predatory lending was becoming a national problem, the Bush administration looked the other way and did nothing to protect American homeowners. In fact, the government chose instead to align itself with the banks that were victimizing consumers.

Predatory lending was widely understood to present a looming national crisis. This threat was so clear that as New York attorney general, I joined with colleagues in the other 49 states in attempting to fill the void left by the federal government.

Food, Fuel and Fascism: Their Election or Your Life?

In a 2004 article by Richard Heinberg published exclusively at From The Wilderness, he revealed a declassified document "The Impending Soviet Oil Crisis" from 1977, exposing the CIA's awareness of Peak Oil. According to Heinberg, "The real motives and long-term strategies of policy makers and intelligence gatherers alike will likely remain opaque to citizens who pay in blood and dollars for their government's military adventures. The Impending Soviet Oil Crisis gives us a rare, limited glimpse into the machinery of covert information analysis and decision-making that shape history as we live it."

[ ... ]

In my recent article "Celebrating UN-President's Day: Why I Will Not Vote For A President In 2008" I laid out my case for not voting, but that was before I saw the latest documentary on election fraud, "Uncounted: The New Math Of American Elections". Anyone seriously considering voting for a president in 2008 must see this documentary as well as Bev Harris's 2006 HBO documentary "Hacking Democracy." You may, in fact, live in one of those rare areas where paper ballot voting still occurs, but "Uncounted" and "Hacking Democracy" reveal a rigged election system, so gargantuan, so blatant, and so foolproof that it is now safe to say that legitimate presidential elections in the United States are no longer possible. In other words, American elections no longer belong to you, but to those who manufacture the candidates and select the winners.

Moreover, in recent days Truth To Power has been covering the proposed purchase of the Diebold Corporation by United Technologies, a major U.S. weapons manufacturer and defense contractor. An analysis of the ramifications of this purchase, now put on hold as a result of UT's low bid, can be read at Catherine Austin Fitts's blogspot. Nevertheless, rocket science is not required in order to comprehend the significance of a major defense contractor having control of voting in America. Although the deal has not been consummated, Diebold is seeking a buyer and is likely to eventually sell its strategic position to a more powerful entity-the value of which is truly priceless because corporate control of elections represents the ultimate triumph of fascism in the United States.

In addition, no president, elected or selected in 2008, has the capacity to reverse the fascist trajectory of the republic launched by the Patriot Act, the Military Commissions Act, and the myriad other ostensibly anti-terrorist measures resulting from either legislation or Executive Orders during the George W. Bush administration. In fact, all three leading candidates embrace the War on Terror and shamelessly behave as emissaries for the military industrial complex.