A couple days ago I hear on the radio that some Canadian company just received 1.2 million pounds of yellow cake uranium that had been found in Iraq several years ago.

So much for Bush lied . . .

kind of makes Joe Wilson look like a big fat liar.


Almost no coverage of this by the media.  

You would think the president would be saying  see I told you so and the libtards lied to you as usual.

www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,377443,00.html

Officials told The New York Times that while the material could not be used in its current form for a nuclear weapon or dirty bomb, the unstable environment in Iraq, along with the health dangers that can be caused from it sitting around in concentrated forms, encouraged officials to make sure it was put in secure hands. The Times noted that the yellowcake removed from Iraq is not the same yellowcake that President Bush claimed in his 2003 State of the Union address that Hussein tried to buy from Niger.

maybe that's why it's not all over the news.

Quoted: Officials told The New York Times that while the material could not be used in its current form for a nuclear weapon or dirty bomb, the unstable environment in Iraq, along with the health dangers that can be caused from it sitting around in concentrated forms, encouraged officials to make sure it was put in secure hands. The Times noted that the yellowcake removed from Iraq is not the same yellowcake that President Bush claimed in his 2003 State of the Union address that Hussein tried to buy from Niger. maybe that's why it's not all over the news.

Does it really matter where he got it from if the had it already?
You riding without a helmet again?

Since the entire premise for the Iraq war was about the credibility of the sources / quality of the information - yeah, it kinda is.

Regardless, nice to see that crap taken off the street. Then again, FARC has it and it would be rather naive to assume that it isn't relatively available. Since it lends itself best to a dirty bomb, the issue again is securing the border; and again Bush has a weak record. Yet another reason why they may not be too loud about this.

Quoted: Since the entire premise for the Iraq war was about the credibility of the sources / quality of the information - yeah, it kinda is. Regardless, nice to see that crap taken off the street. Then again, FARC has it and it would be rather naive to assume that it isn't relatively available. Since it lends itself best to a dirty bomb, the issue again is securing the border; and again Bush has a weak record. Yet another reason why they may not be too loud about this.

How do you figure?
If a drug dealer has 20 pounds of coke does it matter where he got it?

Yes, some intel was fubar, be we all know Iraq had WMDs. Pretending that that they didnt doesnt change the fact that they did.

Quoted: Quoted: Since the entire premise for the Iraq war was about the credibility of the sources / quality of the information - yeah, it kinda is. Regardless, nice to see that crap taken off the street. Then again, FARC has it and it would be rather naive to assume that it isn't relatively available. Since it lends itself best to a dirty bomb, the issue again is securing the border; and again Bush has a weak record. Yet another reason why they may not be too loud about this. How do you figure? If a drug dealer has 20 pounds of coke does it matter where he got it? Yes, some intel was fubar, be we all know Iraq had WMDs. Pretending that that they didnt doesnt change the fact that they did.

Like I said I am glad it is off the street.

How do I figure? Well for starters 232 years of American jurisprudence.... Using your example if LE and the state built a case on witnesses that weren't credible and used faultly information to obtain a search warrant, only to later find drugs in a place / time / and circumstance wholy unrated to said warrant - what would happen?

I've read a fair amount about the subject and you're right at one point we did find evidence of WMDs. In fact, IIRC it did make the backpage of the national print media for a nanosecond. However while WMD and links to terrorism were the justifications offered; they were not the reasons. This coupled with a poorly thought out plan for after the fall (and the even worse management of Paul Bremer) effectively translates the same as the above example in the American court of public opinion. Sure, the good guys got the coke off the street but b/c of the way they went about it the jury will not convict.

Quoted: Officials told The New York Times that while the material could not be used in its current form for a nuclear weapon or dirty bomb, the unstable environment in Iraq, along with the health dangers that can be caused from it sitting around in concentrated forms, encouraged officials to make sure it was put in secure hands. The Times noted that the yellowcake removed from Iraq is not the same yellowcake that President Bush claimed in his 2003 State of the Union address that Hussein tried to buy from Niger. maybe that's why it's not all over the news.

A million pounds of yellowcake is still evidence of WMD.  It doesn't really matter if Hussein (Saddam not Barack) got it from Niger, N.Korea, Russia, Syria or some other evil empire.

Quoted: Quoted: Quoted: Since the entire premise for the Iraq war was about the credibility of the sources / quality of the information - yeah, it kinda is. Regardless, nice to see that crap taken off the street. Then again, FARC has it and it would be rather naive to assume that it isn't relatively available. Since it lends itself best to a dirty bomb, the issue again is securing the border; and again Bush has a weak record. Yet another reason why they may not be too loud about this. How do you figure? If a drug dealer has 20 pounds of coke does it matter where he got it? Yes, some intel was fubar, be we all know Iraq had WMDs. Pretending that that they didnt doesnt change the fact that they did. Like I said I am glad it is off the street. How do I figure? Well for starters 232 years of American jurisprudence.... Using your example if LE and the state built a case on witnesses that weren't credible and used faultly information to obtain a search warrant, only to later find drugs in a place / time / and circumstance wholy unrated to said warrant - what would happen? I've read a fair amount about the subject and you're right at one point we did find evidence of WMDs. In fact, IIRC it did make the backpage of the national print media for a nanosecond. However while WMD and links to terrorism were the justifications offered; they were not the reasons. This coupled with a poorly thought out plan for after the fall (and the even worse management of Paul Bremer) effectively translates the same as the above example in the American court of public opinion. Sure, the good guys got the coke off the street but b/c of the way they went about it the jury will not convict.

You are trying to mix to things here. 232 years of american justice system has nothing to do with it. Since when has the UN followed the rules of the american court system? Thats right, they havent. Yet we are forced to go thru them for any action taken. Again who cares how we get there, these guys dont have the the rights you are trying to compare them too. We needed only get passed the UN for PC reasons, AND WE DID. The justification to go into Iraq based on WMDs WAS the REASON to go. All the other reasons were benifits.

Again the bottomline is he HAD WMDs and had been turning his nose at UN resolution after resolution. He was a murdering douche bag with even worse sons that were lined to take the throne. They needed to be taken care of no matter how it was done.

As for the occupation of iraq up to this point, needed. Will be needed for years to come. With all the unrest in that region we need to maintain a presence over there. That area is a shit hole that does directly effects the safety of our country. We cant simply ignore it.

You seem to be skipping around abit -

Tell me a little about what you have read as related to the run up to the war? Just picking one of books that I have read on the subject - Bush At War made it pretty clear: WMD and terrorist links were the justification but were not the reason for the invasion of Iraq.

Secondly as we both acknowledge, while WMD was found years later; out of the literally tens of millions of pages of documents seized from the now deposed government there was nothing to indicate that the Iraqis had financed, trained, armed, equipped, or facilitated Bin Laden and Al Qaeda. The documents did reveal that they were not strangers to one another though.

As for me mixing things – no I am not. It was America that invaded Iraq – not the UN. America led the charge based on facts and evidence that we produced. I am not sure why you are discussing the UN in this context. Aside from the decade long inspection program (a farce) which revealed nothing, they aren’t relevant to this topic. What is germane to the topic is that a statement presented as fact by President Bush in the 2003 State of the Union Address; a statement that like so many others surrounding the Iraq war – was bogus.

Again, based on American Jurisprudence – the credibility of the evidence presented is the keystone to the prosecution’s case.

Quoted: You seem to be skipping around abit - Tell me a little about what you have read as related to the run up to the war? Just picking one of books that I have read on the subject - Bush At War made it pretty clear: WMD and terrorist links were the justification but were not the reason for the invasion of Iraq. Secondly as we both acknowledge, while WMD was found years later; out of the literally tens of millions of pages of documents seized from the now deposed government there was nothing to indicate that the Iraqis had financed, trained, armed, equipped, or facilitated Bin Laden and Al Qaeda. The documents did reveal that they were not strangers to one another though. As for me mixing things – no I am not. It was America that invaded Iraq – not the UN. America led the charge based on facts and evidence that we produced. I am not sure why you are discussing the UN in this context. Aside from the decade long inspection program (a farce) which revealed nothing, they aren’t relevant to this topic. What is germane to the topic is that a statement presented as fact by President Bush in the 2003 State of the Union Address; a statement that like so many others surrounding the Iraq war – was bogus. Again, based on American Jurisprudence – the credibility of the evidence presented is the keystone to the prosecution’s case.

So a book authored by an editor from the Washington post is your source of info?
Do you get your gun facts from the Brady Camp as well?
Political advise from DU?


On your second point, dont be foolish enough to think that because you and I havent heard about it that there was not more of a connection to al queda. Its stupid to think that all the intel regarding this was available to the general public.

Yes it was an American led attack, however it was not done without the approval of the UN.
Your example of us law in regards to international law is the reason i brought that up. This war is not happening on our streets, its happening abroad and does not fall under the same legalities. Please correct me if I am wrong.

It is hard to have a discussion with someone that has a tough time staying on point - Bush stated something as fact that was indeed bogus. It is of critical relevance as the quality of the evidence presented to the American public was part of the rationale for entering the conflict.

Secondly, it is hard to have a discussion with someone that is not widely read or well informed. I asked you a question - what have you read? Am I to infer "nothing" is the correct answer? I also stated "one of the books that I read" - here's another - the authorized edition of the 9/11 Commission Report. Also, it WAS reported that of the 10's of millions of documents seized they found no evidence that indicated that Bin Laden / Al Qeada received financing, weapons, logistics, training, or any other form of support prior to 9/11 nor after. Those same documents did indicate that they were not unfamiliar with each other. Just as it WAS reported that WMD was found in country.

Lastly, like I said I am happy that it is off the street.

*sigh*

WMDs were found in Iraq. How they got there doesnt matter. THAT is what the topic of this thread is about.

I was not the one that turned this thread into a debate on why we went to war. That was you.

The big difference here is that I dont really care "why" we went as long as we did.

Regardless of your view on the war, the fact remains that the government has lied to the public millions of times. They have stolen our nations wealth, shipped out our industrial base and have allowed our borders to be completely wide open. ALL of this against public will. It would behoove people to remember that our elected officials are our employees. They are not all powerful, well unless you are referring to bush. PNAC and PDD51 pretty much spell out their plan. Too bad so many Americans are living in denial and fear. Turn off CNN and pick up the books and and official documents written by our elected officials.

It is also fact that government is blowing out our economy. Believe what you want about some cake supposedly found in Iraq. Facts are Afghanistan, Iraq and now Iran pose no threat to the populace of the U.S. If baby bush invades Persia this country's economy will be completely ruined. We're talking an inflationary depression that will make the great depression look like a picnic. War is about profit and consolidating wealth and resources. Our country has been used as a vehichle for world conquest by the elite and the game is almost up. One thing you can take to the bank is that we will be left holding the bag. Prepare for the worst while it is still possible. All of this is designed to bring in a world government. It is simple: problem, reaction, solution. I have faith that they will fail and be brought to justice. A final exposing of our global ails. The folly of fiat: it always comes to an end.

Yea $4.50/gal and a collapsing dollar/financial system was totally worth babysitting ragheads. Funny thing is, saddam was a better babysitter than we are.

Ohh, and don't forget about $0.40/round ammo and ZERO surplus. Gee, in another year we'll be at $6.00/gal and $0.60-$0.80/round. Happy shooting!

Quoted: Yea $4.50/gal and a collapsing dollar/financial system was totally worth babysitting ragheads. Funny thing is, saddam was a better babysitter than we are. Ohh, and don't forget about $0.40/round ammo and ZERO surplus. Gee, in another year we'll be at $6.00/gal and $0.60-$0.80/round. Happy shooting!

opec

i truly hope your s/n does not suggest you are employed in economics. for what its worth iraqi are not "ragheads".

back to the topic. yellow cake is not naturally occurring, it was refined to that point, and with the volume found the intent is clear

Quoted: Regardless of your view on the war, the fact remains that the government has lied to the public millions of times. They have stolen our nations wealth, shipped out our industrial base and have allowed our borders to be completely wide open. ALL of this against public will. It would behoove people to remember that our elected officials are our employees. They are not all powerful, well unless you are referring to bush. PNAC and PDD51 pretty much spell out their plan. Too bad so many Americans are living in denial and fear. Turn off CNN and pick up the books and and official documents written by our elected officials. It is also fact that government is blowing out our economy. Believe what you want about some cake supposedly found in Iraq. Facts are Afghanistan, Iraq and now Iran pose no threat to the populace of the U.S. If baby bush invades Persia this country's economy will be completely ruined. We're talking an inflationary depression that will make the great depression look like a picnic. War is about profit and consolidating wealth and resources. Our country has been used as a vehichle for world conquest by the elite and the game is almost up. One thing you can take to the bank is that we will be left holding the bag. Prepare for the worst while it is still possible. All of this is designed to bring in a world government. It is simple: problem, reaction, solution. I have faith that they will fail and be brought to justice. A final exposing of our global ails. The folly of fiat: it always comes to an end.

Back to DU with you troll.

Quoted: Yea $4.50/gal and a collapsing dollar/financial system was totally worth babysitting ragheads. Funny thing is, saddam was a better babysitter than we are. Ohh, and don't forget about $0.40/round ammo and ZERO surplus. Gee, in another year we'll be at $6.00/gal and $0.60-$0.80/round. Happy shooting!

Babysitting ragheads.... Nice.

Quoted: Quoted: Yea $4.50/gal and a collapsing dollar/financial system was totally worth babysitting ragheads. Funny thing is, saddam was a better babysitter than we are. Ohh, and don't forget about $0.40/round ammo and ZERO surplus. Gee, in another year we'll be at $6.00/gal and $0.60-$0.80/round. Happy shooting! opec i truly hope your s/n does not suggest you are employed in economics. for what its worth iraqi are not "ragheads". back to the topic. yellow cake is not naturally occurring, it was refined to that point, and with the volume found the intent is clear

How dare you use logic here.

Uhh, what else would you call what we're doing in Iraq? It certainly has nothing to do with making America a safer place.

LoL, I just read two news articles; the first stating that the Fed is taking on Indymac's $9B in liabilities, when the FDIC only has about $53B in assets - so just 1 bank is taking up about 20% of it's assets. Another 150 are on the watch list....

Then, I read that prime turd Nuri Al-Maliki is LITERALLY handing out hundreds of thousands of dollars of cold hard cash to Iraqi ragheads to keep them happy. I wonder where he got those dollars....hrm...

Although I studied Econ, I am not employed by the government, and the economics they teach in schools today got us precisely in the mess we are in today. I'm not trying to take party lines here - my allegiance will always be to the American people and for their best interests. I thought most people had come to the realization to what the war actually was about...don't worry you'll know soon enough my friend!

Quoted: Uhh, what else would you call what we're doing in Iraq?

War crimes?  

Quoted: Uhh, what else would you call what we're doing in Iraq? It certainly has nothing to do with making America a safer place. LoL, I just read two news articles; the first stating that the Fed is taking on Indymac's $9B in liabilities, when the FDIC only has about $53B in assets - so just 1 bank is taking up about 20% of it's assets. Another 150 are on the watch list.... Then, I read that prime turd Nuri Al-Maliki is LITERALLY handing out hundreds of thousands of dollars of cold hard cash to Iraqi ragheads to keep them happy. I wonder where he got those dollars....hrm... Although I studied Econ, I am not employed by the government, and the economics they teach in schools today got us precisely in the mess we are in today. I'm not trying to take party lines here - my allegiance will always be to the American people and for their best interests. I thought most people had come to the realization to what the war actually was about...don't worry you'll know soon enough my friend!

I thought Bush got us here? Which is it, bush or the schools?

Quoted: Quoted: Uhh, what else would you call what we're doing in Iraq? War crimes?

Quoted: Then, I read that prime turd Nuri Al-Maliki is LITERALLY handing out hundreds of thousands of dollars of cold hard cash to Iraqi ragheads to keep them happy. I wonder where he got those dollars....hrm...

Considering that Iraq currently brings in $200 million a day in oil revenue and they are still way behing in production capability....   Gosh, where could they get hundreds of thousands of dollars?

the Fed is taking on Indymac's $9B in liabilities, when the FDIC only has about $53B in assets - so just 1 bank is taking up about 20% of it's assets. Another 150 are on the watch list....


Studied econ? Really?

FDIC covers individual account holders for up to $100,000 and $250,000 for certs of dep against LOSS. How much loss has there been? Oh yeah, the audit isn’t in. Secondly, IndyMac’s problems have to do with a portfolio top heavy with ‘triple no’ real estate loans – even if those barrowers are foreclosed on you are inferring that the underlying assets have no value . You’re skewing the facts to suit your reality. Lastly, if you really think that the econ been taught today in school is what led to Iraq war, you haven’t studied much econ.

I don't like war but i like the Brawless protester chicks.. they have this Earthy smell.

Quoted: I don't like war but i like the Brawless protester chicks.. they have this Earthy smell.

I think that's called contact high.
wait... why are you going around smelling hippies?
oh, right, contact high.

Quoted: Quoted: Quoted: Uhh, what else would you call what we're doing in Iraq? War crimes?

I know, I know.  I don't usually post on these topics - being the skunk at the picnic, no matter how correct, is never a welcome thing to be.

But I just couldn't resist the straightline like that.  

Quoted: Quoted: Quoted: Quoted: Uhh, what else would you call what we're doing in Iraq? War crimes?   I know, I know.  I don't usually post on these topics - being the skunk at the picnic, no matter how correct, is never a welcome thing to be. But I just couldn't resist the straightline like that.

Right, thats all our troops are doing over there, never mind all the good that is being done. Forget about locating and killing Saddam and his rapist murdering sons. Forget the building of hospitals and school houses. Forget about the yellow cake....

Quoted: Quoted: Quoted: Quoted: Uhh, what else would you call what we're doing in Iraq? War crimes?   I know, I know.  I don't usually post on these topics - being the skunk at the picnic, no matter how correct, is never a welcome thing to be. But I just couldn't resist the straightline like that.

Put the Blue Kool Aid down for a minute and give us a cogent argument for your positon, b/c unless I am missing the sarcasim (very possible) this is intellectually dishonest argument professed by those on faulty moral high ground.

Well a couple good reasons

Saddam's willful and defiant failure to abide by 17 UN resolutions after the Gulf War, his history of development of WMD programs and use of such weapons on his own people and Iran, and his links to and support for terror groups.  The invasion came after 9/11 and continued the effort by the Administration to take the offensive overseas, rather than allow terror groups and terror supporting nations (all part of the same global jihad) to take the battle to us, as Al Qaeda had repeatedly done during the Clinton years, with virtually no response by that Administration.

Not to mention the terrorist training facilities that were shown - mock ups of airliners and such.

Lets see, not to mention that Iraq is the second largest oil producing nation in the middle east.

Freedom and democracy are so taken for granted here in the US.  We spend so much effort and money fighting for women to have equal rights - to make exactly the same or more than men.  Fighting to change things as minor as standardized test questions because they have somehow been determined to favor white males.

But the left which so vigorously fights for those causes seems not to care about the total and complete oppression of women in Iraq.  A teenage girl strangled by her father because she smiled and spoke to a man.  Beatings that are delivered upon wives and mistresses because they allowed there head to be uncovered.  Not to mention the prohibition against education and suffrage (that's the right to vote).

The leftists want to crucify U.S. soldiers for hooking up wires to terrorists and pretending to perpare them for electric shocks in an attempt to gain strategic information but don't seem to give a rip when islamofascists cut execute women and children because they brought "dishonor" to the family.

The question of whether we are going to go to war was answered long long ago.  It was nearly unanimous.  It was made by radical leftists such as Hillary Clinton.  She based her decision on her own fact finding mission.  She had the same intelligence that Bush had, she went to the middle east herself, and backed the decision to go to war.  It was not until later that she and other members of the party of defeat embraced surrender.  These members of the party of defeat want to surrender Iraq, the first true democracy in the Arab world, appease the murderous dictators of other regimes such as Iran, Syria, and Lebanon, and hope that they will be nice.  That is crazy.  That is the result of your blue coolaid.

Quoted: Well a couple good reasons Saddam's willful and defiant failure to abide by 17 UN resolutions after the Gulf War, his history of development of WMD programs and use of such weapons on his own people and Iran, and his links to and support for terror groups.  The invasion came after 9/11 and continued the effort by the Administration to take the offensive overseas, rather than allow terror groups and terror supporting nations (all part of the same global jihad) to take the battle to us, as Al Qaeda had repeatedly done during the Clinton years, with virtually no response by that Administration. Not to mention the terrorist training facilities that were shown - mock ups of airliners and such. Lets see, not to mention that Iraq is the second largest oil producing nation in the middle east. Freedom and democracy are so taken for granted here in the US.  We spend so much effort and money fighting for women to have equal rights - to make exactly the same or more than men.  Fighting to change things as minor as standardized test questions because they have somehow been determined to favor white males. But the left which so vigorously fights for those causes seems not to care about the total and complete oppression of women in Iraq.  A teenage girl strangled by her father because she smiled and spoke to a man.  Beatings that are delivered upon wives and mistresses because they allowed there head to be uncovered.  Not to mention the prohibition against education and suffrage (that's the right to vote). The leftists want to crucify U.S. soldiers for hooking up wires to terrorists and pretending to perpare them for electric shocks in an attempt to gain strategic information but don't seem to give a rip when islamofascists cut execute women and children because they brought "dishonor" to the family. The question of whether we are going to go to war was answered long long ago.  It was nearly unanimous.  It was made by radical leftists such as Hillary Clinton.  She based her decision on her own fact finding mission.  She had the same intelligence that Bush had, she went to the middle east herself, and backed the decision to go to war.  It was not until later that she and other members of the party of defeat embraced surrender.  These members of the party of defeat want to surrender Iraq, the first true democracy in the Arab world, appease the murderous dictators of other regimes such as Iran, Syria, and Lebanon, and hope that they will be nice.  That is crazy.  That is the result of your blue coolaid.

Agreed 100%.

However, and unless I misinterpreted the sarcasim - I am asking Gunhobbit why he thinks WE are committing war crimes.

Quoted: However, and unless I misinterpreted the sarcasim - I am asking Gunhobbit why he thinks WE are committing war crimes.

That's easy.

Anything that goes beyond the following scenario is torture and abuse that constitutes a war crime for which the President should be punished:

CIA operative:  "Please would you tell us critical information that we can use against other Islamofascists to protect infidels?  Before you answer I need to inform you that you enjoy the same constitutional rights as the criminally accused American citizen and have thight to remain silent if you wish, you have the right to get an attorney to represent you at the expense of the productive members of the USA.  I should also inform you that if you find this question offensive in any way you don't have to answer."

Syrian born Terrorist that was taken into custody after killing an Iraqi citizen defending his family; bludgeoning a small child to death for being apostate; and then firing on US forces in Iraq:  "No"

CIA operative:  "OK you are free to leave."

OH that's right the Obama nation would think that is a war crime too because the CIA operative was speaking in the tongue of the Great Satan - America.

It's funny these are the same people that work tirelessly to put criminals back on the streets and generally support the killing of our unborn children.

You truely have to wonder whose side they are on.

Quoted: ......

Amen!

height=8

Quoted: the Fed is taking on Indymac's $9B in liabilities, when the FDIC only has about $53B in assets - so just 1 bank is taking up about 20% of it's assets. Another 150 are on the watch list.... Studied econ? Really? FDIC covers individual account holders for up to $100,000 and $250,000 for certs of dep against LOSS. How much loss has there been? Oh yeah, the audit isn’t in. Secondly, IndyMac’s problems have to do with a portfolio top heavy with ‘triple no’ real estate loans – even if those barrowers are foreclosed on you are inferring that the underlying assets have no value . You’re skewing the facts to suit your reality. Lastly, if you really think that the econ been taught today in school is what led to Iraq war, you haven’t studied much econ.

Yes I did study econ. And the situation with the FDIC is more of an accounting situation, the insurance on deposits comes in later. Indymac couldn't make the 'monthly payments' on it's liabilities, and it didn't have enough money to pay expenses. Lets look at the assets and liabilities now, where the liabilities are greater. The losses the FDIC are looking at is the difference between the two, and when you seize a company, you get both. What 'assets' were gained? A bunch of CDOs 'collaterized debt organizations' and MBS 'mortgage-backed securities' which were bundled by Fannie mae/freddie mac. Since the CDO market doesn't exist anymore, I bet those 'assets' are worth about $0.00, because no one will buy them. The point being it doesn't matter if there is a house there or not-  who the hell would want to have a literal house as part of their 401k, IRA, etc..especially in the current situation, and if you can't sell something in exchange for dollars, then it has 0 value in dollars. The banks that will fail in the future are basically in the same situation, and that's what caused the initial sell off in January, because people started seeing through the emperors clothes and realized that these 'assets' were virtually worthless. Another nail in the coffin for CDS and MBS is the elimination of monoline bond insurance, which you may inquire into as well. So now we return to the FDIC, which I believe in a few months time, and after billions of liabilities are assumed, it will be insolvent as well, meaning that the liabilities of the banks assumed will be greater than the assets on hand. Since you felt that I was skewing the value of the 'assets,' why did the Fed have to put $29B on its books when BearStearns was bailed out? If that portfolio was so attractive, why didn't JP Morgan want to take it over? Why has the Fed bought (excuse me 'loaned') over $500B in exchange for these 'assets?' It's because it's paying $500,000 grand for the mortgage that no one else wants to buy on a house that no one wants to repossess. You know what they do with these houses in the heartland of America? They bulldoze them because of the vagrants and threat of fire.

When the FDIC becomes insolvent (and yes the government will tell you otherwise and declare bank holidays, and play other games not to pay out insurance payments), don't you think most people might want to secure what cash they have? I know I would not like to have to wait in line to pull out my money, if there is any left over, due to the fractional reserve system where about the bank has less than 2% of people bank accounts on hand. When a sizable amount of people lose faith in the FDIC, as they have lost faith in the 3rd largest bank in the US (countrywide), other banks will then begin to fail as well. People who have secured debt, i.e. bond holders, are wayyyyyy in front of depositors to get their funds.

To your last comment, fractional reserve banking is was precisely led to the ability of the US to go to war in Iraq. If the American people were presented with the choice of going to war, in exchange for upfront $4.50 gas, collapse of the mortgage market, and a 20% drop in the DOW, Nasdaq, S&P, and of course $0.40 rnd .223 and the elimination of surplus ammo, and have the war go for 5+ years, what would most people say? That's the reason why gov loves fractional reserve banking - they get to spend the money without being accountable to anyone and make the people pay for it!

My friends, I don't want to scare you or belittle your beliefs, but as a US Marine, whom members of my company have died in Iraq, I can't figure out what the hell good that war as done for America. We have a 'war on terror' with an open border. We send $1B a day and hundreds of thousands of America's Finest there but we can't send them literally 20 miles from bases in San Diego and Camp P to the border? I have humped with a 80lbs pack more than 20 miles because my CO wanted to do it for the shit of it.

My patriotism isn't defined by party lines - it's defined by what is best for the American people.

height=8

Quoted: height=8 Quoted: Uhh, what else would you call what we're doing in Iraq? It certainly has nothing to do with making America a safer place. LoL, I just read two news articles; the first stating that the Fed is taking on Indymac's $9B in liabilities, when the FDIC only has about $53B in assets - so just 1 bank is taking up about 20% of it's assets. Another 150 are on the watch list.... Then, I read that prime turd Nuri Al-Maliki is LITERALLY handing out hundreds of thousands of dollars of cold hard cash to Iraqi ragheads to keep them happy. I wonder where he got those dollars....hrm... Although I studied Econ, I am not employed by the government, and the economics they teach in schools today got us precisely in the mess we are in today. I'm not trying to take party lines here - my allegiance will always be to the American people and for their best interests. I thought most people had come to the realization to what the war actually was about...don't worry you'll know soon enough my friend! houghtI never mentioned Bush, because he couldn't do it alone, but he's liable with the other group of traitors to the American people. Don't worry, there are plenty of democrats as well. I took an oath to defend America against all enemies foreign and domestic - I don't care what letter comes after their name, and either should any other Patriot

Quoted: Quoted: the Fed is taking on Indymac's $9B in liabilities, when the FDIC only has about $53B in assets - so just 1 bank is taking up about 20% of it's assets. Another 150 are on the watch list.... Studied econ? Really? FDIC covers individual account holders for up to $100,000 and $250,000 for certs of dep against LOSS. How much loss has there been? Oh yeah, the audit isn’t in. Secondly, IndyMac’s problems have to do with a portfolio top heavy with ‘triple no’ real estate loans – even if those barrowers are foreclosed on you are inferring that the underlying assets have no value . You’re skewing the facts to suit your reality. Lastly, if you really think that the econ been taught today in school is what led to Iraq war, you haven’t studied much econ. Yes I did study econ. And the situation with the FDIC is more of an accounting situation, the insurance on deposits comes in later. Indymac couldn't make the 'monthly payments' on it's liabilities, and it didn't have enough money to pay expenses. Lets look at the assets and liabilities now, where the liabilities are greater. The losses the FDIC are looking at is the difference between the two, and when you seize a company, you get both. What 'assets' were gained? A bunch of CDOs 'collaterized debt organizations' and MBS 'mortgage-backed securities' which were bundled by Fannie mae/freddie mac. Since the CDO market doesn't exist anymore, I bet those 'assets' are worth about $0.00, because no one will buy them. The point being it doesn't matter if there is a house there or not-  who the hell would want to have a literal house as part of their 401k, IRA, etc..especially in the current situation, and if you can't sell something in exchange for dollars, then it has 0 value in dollars. The banks that will fail in the future are basically in the same situation, and that's what caused the initial sell off in January, because people started seeing through the emperors clothes and realized that these 'assets' were virtually worthless. Another nail in the coffin for CDS and MBS is the elimination of monoline bond insurance, which you may inquire into as well. So now we return to the FDIC, which I believe in a few months time, and after billions of liabilities are assumed, it will be insolvent as well, meaning that the liabilities of the banks assumed will be greater than the assets on hand. Since you felt that I was skewing the value of the 'assets,' why did the Fed have to put $29B on its books when BearStearns was bailed out? If that portfolio was so attractive, why didn't JP Morgan want to take it over? Why has the Fed bought (excuse me 'loaned') over $500B in exchange for these 'assets?' It's because it's paying $500,000 grand for the mortgage that no one else wants to buy on a house that no one wants to repossess. You know what they do with these houses in the heartland of America? They bulldoze them because of the vagrants and threat of fire. When the FDIC becomes insolvent (and yes the government will tell you otherwise and declare bank holidays, and play other games not to pay out insurance payments), don't you think most people might want to secure what cash they have? I know I would not like to have to wait in line to pull out my money, if there is any left over, due to the fractional reserve system where about the bank has less than 2% of people bank accounts on hand. When a sizable amount of people lose faith in the FDIC, as they have lost faith in the 3rd largest bank in the US (countrywide), other banks will then begin to fail as well. People who have secured debt, i.e. bond holders, are wayyyyyy in front of depositors to get their funds. To your last comment, fractional reserve banking is was precisely led to the ability of the US to go to war in Iraq. If the American people were presented with the choice of going to war, in exchange for upfront $4.50 gas, collapse of the mortgage market, and a 20% drop in the DOW, Nasdaq, S&P, and of course $0.40 rnd .223 and the elimination of surplus ammo, and have the war go for 5+ years, what would most people say? That's the reason why gov loves fractional reserve banking - they get to spend the money without being accountable to anyone and make the people pay for it! My friends, I don't want to scare you or belittle your beliefs, but as a US Marine, whom members of my company have died in Iraq, I can't figure out what the hell good that war as done for America. We have a 'war on terror' with an open border. We send $1B a day and hundreds of thousands of America's Finest there but we can't send them literally 20 miles from bases in San Diego and Camp P to the border? I have humped with a 80lbs pack more than 20 miles because my CO wanted to do it for the shit of it. My patriotism isn't defined by party lines - it's defined by what is best for the American people.

Wow... I had no idea an IndyMac board member posted here!

That's a nice story that you fabricated out of your ass and all, but YOU have no idea of the bank's balance sheet and no one will until the auditors are done.

As for the rest of it - again your skewing things to suit your vision of the world.

Quoted: Quoted: Quoted: Uhh, what else would you call what we're doing in Iraq? It certainly has nothing to do with making America a safer place. LoL, I just read two news articles; the first stating that the Fed is taking on Indymac's $9B in liabilities, when the FDIC only has about $53B in assets - so just 1 bank is taking up about 20% of it's assets. Another 150 are on the watch list.... Then, I read that prime turd Nuri Al-Maliki is LITERALLY handing out hundreds of thousands of dollars of cold hard cash to Iraqi ragheads to keep them happy. I wonder where he got those dollars....hrm... Although I studied Econ, I am not employed by the government, and the economics they teach in schools today got us precisely in the mess we are in today. I'm not trying to take party lines here - my allegiance will always be to the American people and for their best interests. I thought most people had come to the realization to what the war actually was about...don't worry you'll know soon enough my friend! I thought Bush got us here? Which is it, bush or the schools? I never mentioned Bush, because he couldn't do it alone, but he's liable with the other group of traitors to the American people. Don't worry, there are plenty of democrats as well. I took an oath to defend America against all enemies foreign and domestic - I don't care what letter comes after their name, and either should any other Patriot

So you think the president is a traitor?


Oh and I took that same oath, as have many in here so please dont act like you are the only one that has.

.

Quoted: To your last comment, fractional reserve banking is was precisely led to the ability of the US to go to war in Iraq. If the American people were presented with the choice of going to war, in exchange for upfront $4.50 gas, collapse of the mortgage market, and a 20% drop in the DOW, Nasdaq, S&P, and of course $0.40 rnd .223 and the elimination of surplus ammo, and have the war go for 5+ years, what would most people say? That's the reason why gov loves fractional reserve banking - they get to spend the money without being accountable to anyone and make the people pay for it!

Really? What does that have to do with the war in iraq?
how fast you forget...I knoe you have seen this before....


Remember the election in 2006? Thought you might like to read the following.
A little over one year ago:
1) Consumer confidence stood at a 2 1/2 year high;
2) Regular gasoline sold for $2.19 a gallon;
3) The unemployment rate was 4.5%.
that was after 6 years of the Bush admin, and 3 1/2 years of war

Since voting in a Democratic Congress in 2006 we have seen:
1) Consumer confidence plummet;
2) The cost of regular gasoline soar to over $3.50 a gallon;
3) Unemployment is up to 5% (a 10% increase);
4) American households have seen $2.3 trillion in equity value evaporate
(stock and mutual fund losses);
5) Americans have seen their home equity drop by $1.2 trillion dollars;
6) 1% of American homes are in foreclosure.
This is after 1 1/2 years of a dem congress.


Why did we go to war.....because of 9/11 and THIS.

Besides you are one of those "dont vote" whiners so you really dont have any ground to stand on. You just sit on the sidelines and whine....typical liberal BS.

eta: Thank you Fournines!

Quoted: Why did we go to war.....because of 9/11 and THIS.

Great find.

Thank you 4Nines!

height=8

Wow... I had no idea an IndyMac board member posted here! That's a nice story that you fabricated out of your ass and all, but YOU have no idea of the bank's balance sheet and no one will until the auditors are done. As for the rest of it - again your skewing things to suit your vision of the world.

Indymac board member...nice one..?

I just want find the truth of the situation, and you're right, the worst could be over and the Fed can start raising rates and defend the dollar and prices could come down, but I haven't seen any real indication of that happening. Just saying 'you're skewing things to suit my vision' doesn't reassure me that what I explained is happening is wrong. Is there a part of it you specifically disagree?

height=8

Quoted: height=8 Quoted: To your last comment, fractional reserve banking is was precisely led to the ability of the US to go to war in Iraq. If the American people were presented with the choice of going to war, in exchange for upfront $4.50 gas, collapse of the mortgage market, and a 20% drop in the DOW, Nasdaq, S&P, and of course $0.40 rnd .223 and the elimination of surplus ammo, and have the war go for 5+ years, what would most people say? That's the reason why gov loves fractional reserve banking - they get to spend the money without being accountable to anyone and make the people pay for it! Really? What does that have to do with the war in iraq? how fast you forget...I knoe you have seen this before.... Remember the election in 2006? Thought you might like to read the following. A little over one year ago: 1) Consumer confidence stood at a 2 1/2 year high; 2) Regular gasoline sold for $2.19 a gallon; 3) The unemployment rate was 4.5%. that was after 6 years of the Bush admin, and 3 1/2 years of war Since voting in a Democratic Congress in 2006 we have seen: 1) Consumer confidence plummet; 2) The cost of regular gasoline soar to over $3.50 a gallon; 3) Unemployment is up to 5% (a 10% increase); 4) American households have seen $2.3 trillion in equity value evaporate (stock and mutual fund losses); 5) Americans have seen their home equity drop by $1.2 trillion dollars; 6) 1% of American homes are in foreclosure. This is after 1 1/2 years of a dem congress. Why did we go to war.....because of 9/11 and THIS. Besides you are one of those "dont vote" whiners so you really dont have any ground to stand on. You just sit on the sidelines and whine....typical liberal BS. eta: Thank you Fournines!

It takes a lot of time to spend a trillion dollars. Think about how much goods need to be diverted for their normal course and instead be  used by the gov. Correlation doesn't equal causation my friend - we're on the downside of an inflationary bubble, and from the looks of things the dems will retain power for quite some time, and America will hopefully recoup economically in the next 4 years, so then you're going to give them credit?? It's like saying clinton was responsible for the Information revolution in the late 90's - which he clearly wasn't - he was just in power at the time.

I know I'm not the only one who took that oath, but I think it's something we all have in common and we all want to do our best to uphold. I think seeking the truth about the current situation is necessary for me to do that. And you're right, it's scientifically proven that your vote doesn't matter, and morally I can vote for a douche or a turd. Can I hold you responsible for the illegal alien invasion because you voted for bush? Republican had the three branch trifecta and nothing beneficial came of it.

Quoted: And you're right, it's scientifically proven that your vote doesn't matter

I haven't laughed that hard in a long time.

height=8

Quoted: height=8 Quoted: And you're right, it's scientifically proven that your vote doesn't matter haven

I know! It's a little silly how much faith we put into it. Here's the wiki page and with links to peer-reviewed papers: Median voter theorem

Funny thing is the war is probably actually helping the economy.

There are thousands of families that are earning up to double what they would be earning if the soldier was at home.  Not to mention that the soldier is not having to be supported (as in food etc out of the family budget).  

The only real issue to blame on the war is maybe oil prices.  Although there are other factors as well.

The bust in the economy comes from people overspending, running their debt through the roof and not being able to pay it back when things tighten a little.

In my neck of the woods you can't swing a dead cat without hitting some small contractor's monster truck, or his trailer full of ATV's, or his boat, etc.  My area has become so overbuilt it is crazy.  There is a point where everyone who can get a house has one.  Then the building slows down.

If these guys weren,t so burried in debt we wouldn't have such a problem.

As an attorney I do OK as far as income.  When I look at my income I can't afford ATV's or a boat or even too fancy of a car.  My kids are asking "Why does Johnny down the street get a new quad for his 10th birthday and we don't" etc.

"Well son because when the economy tightens up we will have to bail Johnny down the street out.  So they don't starve.  It's like this:  Once upon a time there was a squirrel and a grasshopper.  During the summer the squirrel was busy finding nuts and storing them.  The grasshopper ran around like a stupid idiot buying quads, drinking beer, and basically being lazy.  Then one day the weather began to turn as it always does . . . "

Quoted: I know! It's a little silly how much faith we put into it. Here's the wiki page and with links to peer-reviewed papers: Median voter theorem

looks like you missed some important concepts in science class when you were busy studying econ

Quoted: I just want find the truth of the situation, and you're right, the worst could be over and the Fed can start raising rates and defend the dollar and prices could come down, but I haven't seen any real indication of that happening. Just saying 'you're skewing things to suit my vision' doesn't reassure me that what I explained is happening is wrong. Is there a part of it you specifically disagree?

You studied Econ and you just want to find the truth.


Here is the truth - YOU don't know anything. To state as fact what you have is beyond silly. You have no credible data about the subject bank. In fact, since the Fed is already alleging fraud the bank’s investor relations documents really cannot even be relied upon.  Even more outlandish is your previous indictment of FDIC and its being swallowed up by the 150 banks on the watch list. Wow,  you must sit on a lot of bank boards! Oh, wait – you’re a Fed auditor……

The losses the FDIC are looking at is the difference between the two, and when you seize a company, you get both. What 'assets' were gained? A bunch of CDOs 'collaterized debt organizations' and MBS 'mortgage-backed securities' which were bundled by Fannie mae/freddie mac. Since the CDO market doesn't exist anymore, I bet those 'assets' are worth about $0.00, because no one will buy them. The point being it doesn't matter if there is a house there or not- who the hell would want to have a literal house as part of their 401k, IRA, etc..especially in the current situation, and if you can't sell something in exchange for dollars, then it has 0 value in dollars.

I am a big believer that arguing on the internet is like the Special Olympics; that said –

The above concisely sums up your logic and your full understanding of economics and the situation. A fiat currency system works b/c of a third party’s faith in the ability of the Government to honor the obligation. An economy based on fiat currency is simply the velocity of the trades of said fiat money for a service or physical asset. The US Government is moving to (and will fully) back Fannie / Freddy b/c MBSes are tranched investments that have been all sold over the world and are considered ‘good’ investments b/c the US Gov stands behind it. (Although to say that MBS market is gone is funny – thank you for your understanding of how Finance deals with risk.) Secondly, the part about not wanting property b/c you cannot sell something in exchange for dollars Here’s a tip – there are literally hundreds of thousands of transactions that will occur this year, next year, and beyond that will chiefly involve the exchange of US Dollars for property.

Quoted: Funny thing is the war is probably actually helping the economy.

Thank you for pointing this out. While I have never looked it up; while figures lie and liars figure - there is no doubt that if the vast majority of financial costs of the two (2) conflicts are going to American firms it results in a net economic gain to America as a whole.

This is something that is NEVER addressed by the media, blue people, smelly hippies.

height=8

Quoted: height=8 Quoted: Funny thing is the war is probably actually helping the economy. Thank you for pointing this out. While I have never looked it up; while figures lie and liars figure - there is no doubt that if the vast majority of financial costs of the two (2) conflicts are going to American firms it results in a net economic gain to America as a whole. This is something that is NEVER addressed by the media, blue people, smelly hippies.

This is a quick reply until I can address the larger question above. The myth of war/natural disaster being good for the economy has been debunked hundreds of years ago: broken window fallacy

Here is a great post outlining the reasons why there is no MBS/CDO market: Naked Capitalism -- I'll try to summarize it as best I can and then I will further address Indymac's balance sheet later this weekend. It's a bit discouraging when posters tell me I'm flat out wrong and try to shut me up with one-liners, but I know there are a lot of people reading this and learning. If you have questions feel free to ask and I'll try to address as best I can.

Don't get me wrong guys, I wish that the dollar stronger so gas was cheaper. Remember when gas was under a dollar and ammo was $0.10/rnd for the good shit? Those days could come back if we either defend the dollar, or move to the gold standard. There is a chart in the ammo section of arfcom which prices ammo in gold and it's just as cheap as it was 6 years ago. There isn't a shortage of ammo, there's just a surplus of dollars.