Friday, October 14, 2016

Western Foreigners and Sex Trade

This is my reply on a social media site to a Western 'gentleman' that comes to the Far East to participate in 'Sex Trade' and returns home to bad mouth the women, people and the country as a whole.

I know that I am going to say too much and I should keep my thoughts to myself on this subject, but like Donald Trump I cannot keep my thoughts to myself when it comes to some subject, especially the subject of foreign westerners and sex trade.
I will start by saying there are a few good men that come to the Philippines, Thailand and other Third World Countries that marry the local women. They stay in the foreign country and raise families and provide for them. Some take their wife back to their own country. Some take their wife back to their country and return to the wife's country when they retire. BUT, for everyone of these good men there are thousands of sorry S---O---B---'S.
The sorry ones actually believe they are doing these women a BIG favor by coming to their country and spending their money and TAKING ADVANTAGE OF THEM and DESTROYING THEIR LIFE'S. They think they are doing the Philippines a favor by helping the economy.
I have lived in the Philippines for nearly two decades. I am now retired. I was in active ministry when I came. I am now home bound and have a caregiver. I did not come to the Philippines for the sex trade and I have never participated in it. It disgust me when I see the elderly men (younger than me), but old with 17 and 18 year old girls. It is embarrassing because most decent Philippine people assume any white man that comes here comes for these reasons, "cheap food,cheap lodging, cheap beer and cheap p---y" (his words - the only reason he would come to this disgusting, dirty country). Likewise it disgust me when I see the young Western men doing the same, but they are not as noticeable as the old geezers.
The sex trade bars in Los Angeles Philippines are mostly owned by foreign men that married a Filipino woman so they could open a business. They to disgust me. If they wanted to operate a house of prostitution why didn't they stay in their own country and do so. They came to the Philippines because they can take advantage of the POVERTY!
I have worked with the children these nasty men have left behind. Many are scared for life. There was a documentary made some years ago, I think called "Lost Angles", if you can watch that and not feel deep compassion for these children and their mothers then you cannot feel compassion for anyone or anything.
President Duterte should actively address the sex trade in his country as actively as he is pursuing the drug problem. I have more compassion for the drug addicts than the foreign men that come to his country and degrade their women. I honestly believe some addicts in this country got started on drugs because they had a sense of hopelessness. I know the young women selling their bodies to this foreign trash are doing so hoping for a better life. FALSE HOPE - it is like a poor black boy hoping he becomes a professional sports start - few do!
People may criticize the women in these countries calling them all kinds of bad names, but what about the filthy men from THEIR OWN country that come here and other places and destroy life's and leave fatherless children behind?
I think that it would be worthwhile for the media to cover these stories - publish the pictures of these foreign men walking around the streets of Los Angeles, Philippines with young girls hanging on them like strutting cocks getting ready for a cock fight. They should print their names, addresses, country of origin also.
I am against vigilante justice, but if the government cannot solve the problem maybe they could. The goal of the vigilante justice is to make people afraid to use or sell drugs I think that might slow the Philippine sex trade if some of these men did not return to their home country walking and upright.
Yes, I am bitter, yes I am angry, yes I am disgusted with these men taking advantage of the poverty in the Philippines. I know I will get nasty replies, but if just one of these men considering coming to the Philippines or anywhere else to destroy the life of a young girl and possibly a child will rethink his decision then send the hate mail.

Monday, October 10, 2016

General Ban Ki-moon - United Nation head is a hypocrite.

The United States accepted more than 70,000 refugees in 2014, or roughly 700 for every one accepted by South Korea and Japan combined.

The current Secretary-General of the United Nation is Ban Ki-moon of South Korea, who took office on 1 January 2007. He wants to push Syrian refugees off on other nations when his own nation and Japan will not take them. He should not be telling other nations to take them when his own nation will not. 

At the end of September 2015, the Ministry of Justice in South Korea said there are 848 Syrian asylum seekers in South Korea. Of those that applied for refugee status in South Korea only 0.3% were considered. Keep in mind he is using figures from 1994 - to present. There was not a crisis in Syria during those early years. There TOTAL refugees number is 848 from all countries.

UN Secretary General Ban Ki-moon, crucified Hungary for the way it was handling the tens of thousands of immigrants massing on its border, “I was shocked to see how these refugees and migrants were treated by Hungary. It’s not acceptable … since they are the people who are fleeing the violence and persecution, we must ensure our compassionate leadership.” Why is he not shocked that his own country South Korea will not take them in and treat them compassionately? Why isn’t he speaking out against South Korea?

Such hypocrisy, here is a man who likes to think he stands as a moral compass for the world yet he comes from a country that has contributed absolutely nothing in the way of a solution to the human tide generated by the Syria crisis. He wants other countries to shoulder their responsibility, but overlooks the fact that South Korea is doing nothing to help with the problem.  

South Korea does have plenty of company when it comes to talking and not doing. According to Amnesty International, here are a few other countries willing to stand by and do nothing as a human tragedy unfolds: Gulf countries including Qatar, United Arab Emirates, Saudi Arabia, Kuwait and Bahrain have offered zero resettlement places to Syrian refugees. Other high income countries including Russia, Japan, Singapore along with South Korea have also offered zero resettlement places.

Why hasn’t our Imperial President Obama brought this to the attention of the American people? Why has he not spoken out publicly about the fact the head of the United Nations cannot even get his own country to take in refugees? 

I do not want any of the Syrian refugees to be allowed in the United States. I do believe we should established a safe zone in their own country for them and I think ALL countries that are members of the United Nation should shoulder that responsibility.  

Tuesday, October 4, 2016

Donald Trump is a fool!

Those that read my blog know that I have been a supporter of Donald Trump from the day he announced his campaign. I will still vote for him, but for one reason only, I do not want Hillary Clinton appointing any Supreme Court Justices.

I watched from my wheelchair as Donald Trump mocked Hillary Clinton going to her car. I must say he stooped to a new low. When I was his age I was working in my profession fifteen hours a day six days a week and had few health issues. In just a few short years my health had deteriorated and today I am home bound cared for by caregivers. The same could happen to him!

I think the man is an arrogant, pompous, disgusting person who respects no one but his immediate family. I gave him credit for raising beautiful children, but today I think they must have had very intelligent mother's.

Only a fool would fall into the traps that Hillary Clinton is setting for him. The beauty contestant issue is a fine example of that. Intelligent people know beauty contest are about looks and besides there was a stipulation in her contract about weight. Donald Trump did not need to make any comment at all about the issue. He has subordinates that could have done that for him, but instead as he has many times he opened his big mouth, let his tongue start flopping and forgot to engage his brain.

I think Hillary Clinton is a habitual liar and criminal. I do not think Donald Trump is those things are at least he is not as bad as her. But, I am convinced now that he is a very foolish man!

He will most likely lose the election because he cannot stay on message or stay focus. I am afraid the last chapter in his life story will not be that of a great president. I at one time blamed the elitist in the Republican Party for his difficulty during the campaign, but now HE HIMSELF will lose the election without any help from anyone, not even stupid lying Ted Cruz.

I hope people will vote for Trump simply because we cannot afford to be stuck with liberal justices for ten or twenty years.

I am not going to even go back and check this post for errors because I think everyone got my message - Donald Trump is a fool and I am not going to waste any more of my time on the matter. Excuse the mistakes and send all the angry replies you want because I am not going to allow them to go through.

Saturday, October 1, 2016

Is she a justice crusader or an immoral woman?

The atmosphere of the Philippine government at the moment is like a circus or tabloid newspaper. I do not know if the world is watching or not, because I do not know if the average citizens around the world care what is going on in the Philippines.

I believe the way the government deals with their drug problems is an internal matter and others should stay out of it. If the Philippine people are happy with the way their President is dealing with the problem then so be it. When they have had enough they will solve the problem for themselves. When the Philippine people had enough of Spain they booted them out, the same is true of the United States and President Marcos. I do not want outsiders (especially the United Nations) telling Americans how to run their country or what is best for our country.  

I admit I am confused by what the Philippine President says from day to day. One day he wants the U.S. military out of the Philippines and the next day he says he will allow them to stay. I am an expat living in the Philippines and frankly I do not care if the U.S. military is here or not. I would like to know if I am going to be able to stay or not. I am nearing eighty and in bad health. I have been advised by my doctors that I most likely could not survive a trip to the United States and I will be quite happy to die and be buried in the Philippines.

Today, I read posts in social media from some Philippine women about the Senator DE Lima's sex films. They feel that showing the films would shame her and that she should not be shamed because she is a woman. One said, “When you shame Senator DE Lima you are shaming all women.”  One said, “When you shame Senator DE Lima you are shaming all mothers, sisters, aunts and nieces in the Philippines.” How could that possibly be so? My mother, sisters, aunts or nieces have never made a sex tape. How could they be shamed by a sex video that Senator DE Lima allowed to be made. They are not responsible for what Senator DE Lima did and it in no way reflects upon them?

Is the sex video a fake? I do not know, but they appear to be real and if you take her private visits to the prisoners inside the maximum security prison and her attendance at parties sponsored by prisoners and her pictures hanging on the wall of prisons rooms it does not look good for Senator DE Lima. It certainly appears that she made bad decisions.

At the time Senator DE Lima was Secretary of Justice (Attorney General) why would someone in that position allow prisoners to sponsor private parties and invite outside guest to raise money? Why would someone in that position allow prisoners to have their own private quarters with offices and conference rooms and computers? Why would someone in that position visit those private quarters and attend those parties? I wish I could say that I never doubted Senator DE Lima’s sincerity, but I always have, even when she headed up the Human Rights Organization in the Philippines. Her motivation has always been in question by me.

How does it help the people of the Philippines to cover-up her transgression. Does anyone deserve a pass simply because they are a woman, elected official or celebrity? I personally do not think so. In fact I think people in those position, women and men, should be held to a higher standard.

Corruption within the government has been allowed by the people of the Philippines for so long I do not even know how you would begin to clean it up. Perhaps President Duterte’s way is the only way. I am certainly not comfortable with extra judicial killings or vigilante killings, but if the whole system is corrupt how do you clean it up? I still believe President Duterte is doing what he thinks is best for the country. I also can feel his frustration for his countrymen, especially the poor.

I was ask today if Senator DE Lima has ever admitted to doing any wrong and I honestly do not know if she had or not. I have not heard her do so. I could easily forgive anyone that admitted they were wrong and ask forgiveness. It is difficult for me to ignore wrong or the perception of wrong when the person will not admit to their wrong doings or that they may have committed acts that would lead others to perceive she or he had done wrong. Senator DE Lima has not presented any argument thus far that would persuade me that she is not guilty.

God blessed the Philippines with lots of potential. God blessed the Philippines with beautiful landscapes. There is absolutely no reason a country with educated young people to be a Third World Country. Do you blame the people or the corrupt politicians? 

I have learned in my near eight decades on this earth that as long as you allow any human being to take advantage of you they will, so I must ask why have the Philippine people allowed EDSA to be in vain. There will be a price to pay, sacrifices to make for the people to gain control of their government and they must decide is it worth it or not. One thing I am sure of you cannot keep electing the same corrupt politicians and expect things in your life to get better. THINGS only get better in the politicians lives when you keep electing them over and over again. I have never believe politics was meant to be a lifetime career

I want to state the same thing is happening in the United States. We are not electing politicians that give a darn about the people of the United States. They are not in politics to devote their lives to service of the country or the people they are in politics to advance their own personal interest. Of all the people in the United States we cannot find two people better qualified than Hillary Clinton or Donald Trump to run for President. I suppose people that are honest, truthful and moral no longer are interested in associating day in and day out with thugs and criminals.  It is up to the young people in the Philippines and the United States to bring about change in politics for us old people have screwed it up for you.

In closing I cannot wrap my mind around where or when did Senator DE Lime go bad. Was it the result of one bad decision or an accumulation of many bad decisions or was it she forgot what she set out to do and allowed vengeance for one man, the Mayor of Davao City, to take control of her? She had everything going for her and her legacy could have been similar to Senator Santiago, but instead the final chapter of her life story will read like a cheap novel

There is a lesson for us all in this story and that is our decisions do matter. Every decision will play a role in our life story be they good or bad. Not only do our decisions/actions matter the perceptions others have of our decisions/actions matter. If she would have only stopped for a moment and given thought to what she was doing perhaps she would not have taken the wrong path and the same is true for us. Once you start living a lie you will live that lie until you die or be destroyed when the truth comes out. 

Monday, September 19, 2016

Stop and Frisk

I have always been a supporter of the police 'Stop and Frisk' method of policing until recently. I found out I really did not know what I was supporting. The idea to a conservative seems okay in order to reduce crime, but the price is too high to pay when you really come to understand what it involves.

In 2011, the New York City police stopped and searched 684,724 people without any real probable cause except profiling of people. Out of those, 88 percent were black or Hispanic. The New York Police Commissioner said the purpose of the searches were to get guns off the streets, but only in 0.02 percent of the searches turned up any type of weapon.

I have read some of the police reports concerning some of the most ridiculous searches (which most were) and could not believe such police techniques were taking place in the land of 'freedom'. Keep in mind this is all happening while professional criminal (professional bankers) on Wall Street were stealing billions of dollars from innocent investors via the mortgage scam and serving no jail time.

The majority of those arrested were charged with suspicion of Marijuana (although none was found) or blocking a public entrance or blocking a public sidewalk. When they would arrive at the Forty-Second Precinct in the Bronx they would be offered deals - plead guilty, be fined $25 and walk out. Those that refused (which were few) had a trial date set. The trial according to New York statue was suppose to be held within 90 days. The VICTIMS would arrive for the court date and the prosecutor would get an extension because the State was not ready for trial. This would go on sometimes for a year and each time the VICTIM would be offered a plea deal. Most of the time the VICTIM would eventually get tired of missing work or sitting all day in court and would just enter a guilty plea and discover instead of $25 the fine was now $500 plus. Those that could not pay served their time in Rikers Island jail or one of the New York State youth prisons.

The New York City Police Department actually had special plainclothes officers and uniform officers patrolling buses, subways, streets to make arrest. They would arrest one and put him in a van and move on to arrests others when the van was full they would take them to the precinct. It is believed the officers assigned to that duty were on a quota system. I will concede that crime rates did drop in the early 1990's, but I am no longer convinced it was due to 'Stop and Frisk'. Nobody really knows why the crime rate actually dropped there could have been many contributing factors.

Police were even allowed to stop and frisk people in the hallways of their apartment buildings and I am not talking about government housing projects. Hallways of private apartment buildings were considered public spaces.

It is estimated that over one million police man hours were spent on these arrest in one year. In 2012 alone 50,000 summons was written for marijuana possession, 140,000 for violating open-container laws, 80,000 disorderly conduct, 20,000 for riding bicycles on sidewalks. In poor neighborhoods you would be arrested for standing on the sidewalk in front of your apartment or on the corner or sitting on the steps of your apartment building, but in affluent white neighborhoods you could jaywalk and no summons would be issued. People in white neighborhoods were not even aware this was going on in their city.

One case I found interesting and there were many, many similar cases like it was a young black man got off his job (bus driver) his father picked him up at work and dropped him off at his apartment after midnight. As he was entering the apartment a friend that lived in the same apartment was coming out and ask to borrow five dollars. The young black man reached in his pocket and gave him five dollars and two officers came from no where and arrested them for making a drug deal. When no drugs were found the charges were changed to blocking a public entrance. The man would not sign for the ticket and was carried to jail. His case dragged on for a year and finally the prosecutor and judge realized the man was not going to pay a fine and walk away. A trial was finally held the judge ask the police officers if drugs were found to which they replied, "no". He ask was he blocking a public entrance and the officers said, "ye". At which time the young man explained he was coming from work and entering his own apartment building. The judge said you have a job to which he told him "yes driving a bus". The young black man told the judge that it was one in the morning and there was no one on the street. The judge ask the officers was that true and they admitted he was correct, but added they had the authority to arrest anyone standing in a public entrance. The judge threw the case out.

In the United States does a police officer have the right to tell you to move for no reason at all and if you refuse arrest you? This reminds me of Lethohatchie, Alabama in the late 1950's. It was understood blacks could not stand and talk on public sidewalks they had to keep moving. My cousin was the sheriff and harassing the blacks was something he enjoyed. One night his son and I rode with him when he arrested a black man for standing on the street corner and on the way to taking him to jail he stopped for coffee and left the rear door of the patrol car open. I was confused and when inside looking out the window I ask him wasn't he afraid that he would run off and my cousin laughed and said, "I hope he tries there will be one less nigger in Lethohatchie tonight" and he pointed to his gun. Similar policing existed in the 1990's and exits in the 2000's and we wonder why some blacks are protesting today. I do not approve of violent protest, destruction of property, killing police officers and riots, but I understand better now the frustration in the black poor communities.

One thing I never considered was when people are arrested for any thing it could prevent them from getting school scholarships, public housing, credit, employment, etc. The actual summons can sometimes not be the issue at all it is the public record that follows with modern police computer technology.

Some police stop people (usually minorities) and when they do not bend the way the officer wants them to they slap a summons on them.  This is not my words this is the words of Peter Moskos a former Baltimore police officer who wrote Cop in the Hood. If the police stop them and find nothing they will always charge them for loitering and issue a summons. In 2005, 22,000 people were arrested for loitering in New York City. The vast majority of those arrests were dismissed. If they want the police can arrest you for just about anything.

I recently read about a rogue police precinct in Brooklyn that routinely bust into homes without a warrant claiming they suspected the premises to be a drug house. When nothing was found they would bully the occupants to sign a form that they agreed to allow the police to search the premise. Does this sound far fetched. You are wondering why anyone would sign such a form after they had destroyed your property looking for something that was not there. I would have had the same doubts if it had not happen to me.

I owned Enviro-Tech Electronics in Houston, Texas. It was a high end stereo shop and we had customers spending $20,000 on sound systems that we suspected some were drug dealers. They were customers to us and nothing more. One evening the Harris County Sheriff's Department raided my business. They made everyone lay on the floor employees/customers and me.  They even tore the ceiling tiles out and found nothing. After they destroyed my property. An official from the department came and apologized and ask me to sign a form that I had given them permission to search the premises. I first refused and then I ask to call my attorney. My attorney told me to sign the damn form because if I did not they would sit out in front of my business everyday and stop and search every vehicle that left and my business would be destroyed. I signed. They left and even our customers stayed and helped us put the store back in order.  This happen shortly after the incident at Key Truck Stop on I-10 (Channelview, Texas) that was filmed on television and nothing was found. The owners refused to sign and within two years they were out of business because the Harris County Sheriff's Department officers stopped trucks leaving their truck stop delaying the drivers so they quit stopping Key Truck Stop.

If a police officer makes a bad arrests, and if a settlement is granted to those wrongly arrested the tax payers pay for the mistake. Not one penny comes out of the officers pocket. Sometimes settlements are made before the officer even knows one has been made.

There are two sides to every story and what it boils down to are we willing to gamble that our rights will not be violated and accept that it is okay to violate others peoples rights as long as we feel safer.


Thursday, September 15, 2016

The Department of Justice under President Obama was and is a joke!

The Justice Department under President Obama and Eric Holder was and is a joke!
Attorney General Eric Holder and President Obama made sure that none of their friends in the banking industry went to jail for the crimes they committed. A large number of Covington & Burling’s Law Firm corporate clients are mega-banks like JP Morgan Chase, Wells Fargo, Citigroup and Bank of America. Lanny Breuer who ran the criminal division for Holder’s Justice Department and Eric Holder were lawyers for Covington & Burling prior to taking positions under Obama in the Justice Department.  Their specialty was protecting corporations, especially banking, investment and savings corporation from prosecution – looking for loopholes in the law that would allow them to escape prosecution if caught.

Covington & Burling was given the American Lawyer “Litigation Department of the Year,” award in March 2014 for getting clients accused of financial fraud off with  only a slap-on-the-wrist fines. if you want to understand what Eric Holder did for the perpetrators and firms of the largest financial fraud in history that blew up the nation’s economy in 2008, you only have to read one line from his former employer praising Eric Holder: “He helped them, get the best deal they could possibly get.”

As for homeowners, they received a raw deal, in the form of little or no compensation for some of the greatest consumer abuses in American history. As far back as 2004, the FBI warned of an “epidemic” of mortgage fraud, which they said would have “as much impact as the Savings & Loan crisis.” They were wrong; it was worse.

By the time the bubble collapsed, the recession hit and Holder took over the Justice Department, Wall Street was a target-rich environment for any federal prosecutor. Physical evidence to an untold number of crimes was available in court filings and county recording offices. The proof was there. Chief Executives could have been easily held criminally responsible for misrepresenting their risk management controls to bank regulators.

In 2009, Congress passed the Fraud Enforcement and Recovery Act, giving $165 million to the Justice Department to staff the investigations necessary to bring those accountable for the financial crisis to justice. Keep in mind this was a Democrat House and Senate that gave Eric Holder the funds to prosecute these C.E.O.’s. Yet, not one major executive has been sent to jail for their role in the crisis.

The department has put real housewives in jail for mortgage fraud, but not real bankers. The D.O).J. saved their firepower for people who manage to defraud banks, not for banks who manage to defraud people. Most of the “investigations” of financial institutions over six years was swiftly moved to cash settlements, often without holding anyone responsible for admitting wrong doing or providing a detailed description of what they did wrong.

The National Mortgage Settlement, for example, was touted by Holder’s Justice Department as a $25 billion deal. In reality, banks were able to pay one-quarter of that penalty with other people’s money, lowering principal balances on loans they didn’t even own. Banks were even allowed to satisfy their obligations under the settlements through routine business practices (including some, like making loans to low-income homeowners that make them money.

A series of securities fraud settlements with JP Morgan, Bank of America and Citigroup, which the Department of Justice and Eric Holder approved and claimed cost the banks $36.65 billion, actually cost them about $11.5 billion and shareholders, no executives bore that cost. Wall Street Journal has found out that only 25% of the fines were actually collected from the corporations involved in the banking crisis.

The Department of Justice Inspector General criticized this in a March 2014 report and revealed that that the Department of Justice de-prioritized mortgage fraud, making it the “lowest-ranked criminal threat” from 2009-2011.
The banking sector’s get-out-of-jail free card gave them confidence that they could commit the same crimes again, with little if any legal implications and if you think the problem is not continuing you are naive.

The decision to protect banks instead of homeowners should be laid at the feet of President Obama and his administration. Guess where Eric Holder and Lanny Breuer work today – the law firm of Covington and Burling the law firm that represented the big banks during the crisis.

 Eric Holder was U.S. Attorney General when the world desperately needed the nation’s chief law enforcement officer to hold accountable the elite bankers who oversaw the epidemic of fraud that drove the 2008 global financial crisis and triggered the Great Recession. But, nearly six years in office, Holder announced on Sept. 25, 2014 that he plan to step down, without bringing to justice even one of the executives responsible for the crisis. His tenure represents the worst  failure against elite white-collar crime in the history of the Department of Justice. Eric Holder was careful not to step down until the statue of limitation ran out on prosecuting banking executives.

In both the U.S. savings and loan debacle of the late 1980's and the Enron-era accounting frauds of the early 2000's, there were more than 1,000 successful felony convictions in white-collar crime cases. In those cases Federal Prosecutors prioritized the top executives of the corporations responsible and sought convictions.

In addition to the failure to prosecute the leaders of those massive frauds, Holder’s dismal record includes 1) failing to prosecute the elite bankers who led the largest price-rigging cartel in history — the LIBOR scandal, in which the world’s largest banks conspired to rig the interest rates at which banks were willing to lend to one another, which affected prices on over $300 trillion in transactions; 2) failing to prosecute the massive foreclosure frauds (robo-signing), in which bank employees perjured themselves by signing more than 100,000 false affidavits in order to deceive the authorities that they had a right to foreclose on homes; 3) failing to prosecute the bid-rigging cartels of bond issuance in order to raise the costs to U.S. cities, counties and states of borrowing money in order to increase banks’ illegal profits; 4) failing to prosecute money laundering by HSBC for the murderous Sinaloa and Norte del Valle drug cartels; 5)  failing to prosecute the senior bank officers of Standard Chartered who helped fund terrorists and nations that support terrorism; and 6) failing to prosecute the controlling officers of Credit Suisse who for decades helped wealthy Americans unlawfully evade U.S. taxes and then obstructed investigations by the DOJ and Internal Revenue Service for many years.

How quick minority voters either forget or never knew that Eric Holder blamed them for the banking crisis.  Eric Holder stated on more than one occasion that mortgage fraud was largely an ethnic crime that was committed almost exclusively by primarily ethnic borrowers rather than the officers controlling the lenders.

Eric Holder in June 2016 still maintain the Department of Justice did not have the evidence to criminally prosecute banks – how much more evidence did he need? Eric Holder, for a combination of political and self-serving reasons, held his department back.

Career prosecutors in 2012 wanted to criminally charge the global bank HSBC for facilitating money laundering for Mexican drug lords and terrorist groups. But Holder said no. Aggressive attorneys wanted to prosecute HSBC, but Holder overruled them. From 2006 to 2010, HSBC failed to monitor billions of dollars of U.S. dollar purchases with drug trafficking proceeds in Mexico. It also conducted business going back to the mid-1990's on behalf of customers in Cuba, Iran, Libya, Sudan, and Burma, while they were under sanctions. Such transactions were banned by U.S. law. So many people within the Treasury Department were pressuring Eric Holder to charge HSBC than he finally on November 7, presented HSBC with a “take it or leave it” offer of a deferred prosecution agreement, which would involve a cash settlement and future monitoring of HSBC and no criminal charges and no admission of guilt. HSBC negotiated until December getting employee bonus’ guaranteed, a guarantee no employee would ever be criminally prosecuted and the fine reduced and that no one at the bank would ever be tried for aiding terrorist – Eric Holder agreed.

Will President Obama share these facts while on the campaign trail for Hillary Clinton or will he continue to blame George Bush and the Republican Party for all that is wrong with the United States Government?

September 16, 2016 - Deutsche Bank stated  today they have no intention of settling with the U.S. Justice Department over their part in the mortgage/banking scandal for $14 billion dollars. They will not accept any offer higher than Eric Holder gave U.S. Banks. 

Sunday, August 28, 2016

Things I did not know about Israel/Palestine

Last week I began to think how can the Arab’s believe Israel is taking over the Middle East.  There are 22 Arab and or Muslim nations. Iran is not considered and Arab nation. Israel is surrounded by Arab and or Muslim nations. How can anyone say "expansionist Israel" has "taken over" the Middle East or trying to take over the Middle East?

The Arab countries occupy 640 times the amount of land as does Israel and outnumber the Jews of Israel by nearly fifty to one. How convenient that today's Arab Nations are forgetting that land east of the Jordan River was also part of "Palestine". Why are they not demanding Jordan return that area to the Palestinians?

In 1916 control of the southern portion of the Ottoman Empire was turned over to France and Britain under the Sykes-Picot Agreement, which divided the Arab region. Lebanon and Syria were assigned to France and "Palestine" (today's Jordan, Israel and "West Bank" and Gaza ) was given to Great Britain.  Because no other peoples had ever established a national homeland in "Palestine" since the Jews had done it 2,000 years before, the British "looked favorably" upon the creation of a Jewish National Homeland throughout ALL of Palestine.

The Jews had already begun mass immigration into Palestine in the 1880's in an attempt to rid the land of swamps and malaria and to prepare for the rebirth of Israel. This Jewish effort to revitalize the land did not only attracted Jews back to the land it also attracted an equally large immigration of Arabs from neighboring areas who were drawn by employment opportunities and healthier living conditions. There was never any attempt by the Jews to get rid of the Arabs in the land.

in 1946 Trans-Jordan was renamed to "Jordan". The remaining 18% of Palestine, now WEST of the Jordan River, was to be the Jewish Palestinian homeland.  However, sharing was not part of the Arab psychological makeup then or now. With the help of the British the Jews were forced out of Trans-Jordan!

The British at first tried to maintain order but soon due to the large oil deposits being discovered throughout the Arab Middle East they turned a blind eye. It became clear to the Palestinian Jews that they must fight the Arabs and drive out the British. Finally in 1947 the British had enough and turned the Palestine matter over to the United Nations.

The 1947 U.N. Resolution 181 partition plan was to divide the remaining 18% of Palestine into a Jewish Palestinian State and a SECOND Arab Palestinian State  based upon population concentrations.  The Jewish Palestinians accepted... the Arab Palestinians rejected. The Arabs still wanted ALL of Palestine... both east AND west of the Jordan River. Therefore, the resolution was not carried out and it never became legally binding! The Arabs started the 1948 war.

On May 14, 1948 the "Palestinian" Jews finally declared their own State of Israel and became "Israelis." On the next day, seven neighboring Arab armies - Egypt, Jordan, Syria, Lebanon, Saudi Arabia, Iraq and Yemen... invaded Israel. Most of the Arabs living within the boundaries of the newly declared "ISRAEL" were encouraged to leave by the invading Arab armies to facilitate the slaughter of the Jews and were promised to be given all Jewish property after the victorious Arab armies won the war.

The truth is that most of the Arab Palestinians who left Israel in 1948 – between 400,000 to 500,000 – never saw an Israeli soldier! They did not flee because they feared Jews. They left because they believe the Jews would be exterminated and would return afterwards to reclaim their homes, and to inherit Jewish properties as well. They guessed wrong.  The Jews  did not throw out all the Palestinian Arabs living in Israel they chose to leave after being encourage to do so by the seven Arab nations that invaded Israel. Those Arabs who did not flee became Israeli-Arab citizens.

The end result of the 1948-49 Israeli War of Independence was the creation of a Jewish State. From 1949-67 when all of the West Bank, Gaza and Jerusalem were under Arab [Jordanian, Syria and Egyptian] control, no effort was EVER made to create a second Palestinian State for the Arabs living there. Why do many in the world want the Jews to give up part of their country when none of the Arabs were willing to concede any of their land to the 'so called' Palestinian Arabs?

Throughout much of May 1967, the Egyptian, Jordanian and Syrian armies mobilized along Israel's narrow and seemingly indefensible borders in preparation for a massive invasion to eliminate the State of Israel. Within two hours the Egyptian Air Force did not exist most of its planes were destroyed while still on the runways. Unaware that the Egyptians had no more air force, King Hussein of Jordan launched his attack from the his West Bank into Israel, while Syrian troops prepared to descend down the Golan Heights high ground into northern Israel. The Arabs lost the battle in six days they had once again underestimated the Jewish Nation of Israel.  

Now, 35+ years later and despite the fact that Israel won a war started by seven Arab nations and fought by three Arab nations the Israelis are still willing to allow the Arab-Palestinians to have a state on much of the West Bank and Gaza if only they would stop sending their suicide/homicide bombers into the heart of Israel.

Israel was responsible for bringing about some of its own problems. The Arabs in the West Bank and Gaza Strip were packed and ready to leave following their 1967 defeat. Suddenly the victorious Israeli General Moshe Dayan persuaded them to stay. I think this was madness. The Arabs would have slaughtered the Jews if they would have had an opportunity to do so and to this day are still trying to. Dayan's plan was to educate them, offer them modern medical treatment, provide them with employment both in the West Bank, Gaza and inside Israel Proper itself. He thought he would be able to build a healthy relationships with the Arabs – how wrong he was.  If he build a bridge to the Arab world it was a bridge to terrorism.

Jordan accounts for 3/4 of Palestine's original land mass. Though they may call themselves "Jordanians," they are culturally, ethnically, historically and religiously no different than the Arab-"Palestinians" on the "West Bank." Even the flag of Jordan and the flag of the proposed 2nd Arab-Palestinian state on the West Bank / Gaza look almost identical. Why do they not give the 'so called' Palestinians their own land to establish a State or Nation. 

Another thing that is interesting to me is the term "Palestinian". The name had referred to Israeli Jews back in the 1940's, and has been slowly redefined to refer to the Arabs in the West Bank and Gaza. I guess political correctness started much earlier than we thought. 

The Middle East Conflict was always a war by Arabs against Jews, not a conflict between Israelis and "Palestinians." The war was repackaged as a conflict between Jews and Palestinians as a public relations gimmick by the Arab fascist regimes. These regimes had never had any interest in "Palestinians," or in creating a "Palestinian" state, or in "Palestinian nationalism" before 1967. The Palestinians are a regional group of Arabs having virtually no cultural nor national distinctive traits separating them from Syrians, Lebanese, and Jordanians. They are all basically Arabs. Yasser Arafat’s family came to Gaza from Egypt and a wealthy family of current PA President Mahmoud Abbas moved to Tzfat from Damascus, Syria!

The Middle East war continues because it is really an Arab-Israeli war, not an Israeli-Palestinian conflict. It is also in large part a war between barbarism and civilization and in many ways an Islamic religious jihad against the Jews.