The European Tribune is a forum for thoughtful dialogue of European and international issues. You are invited to post comments and your own articles.
Please REGISTER to post.
by Nomad Fri Oct 15th, 2010 at 09:51:25 AM EST
"Life shrinks or expands in proportion to one's courage." - Anaïs Nin
Large Source "Life shrinks or expands in proportion to one's courage." - Anaïs Nin
Former PM Ivo Sanader has requested the re-activation of his mandate in the Croatian Parliament, a Parliament spokesperson has confirmed.Sanader has returned to Croatia to testify in a case concerning the privatization of national company Ina. He has spent the last month in the United States.Some have speculated that Sanader will use his return to gather strength and attempt a political comeback after he stepped down as PM in 2009.
Former PM Ivo Sanader has requested the re-activation of his mandate in the Croatian Parliament, a Parliament spokesperson has confirmed.
Sanader has returned to Croatia to testify in a case concerning the privatization of national company Ina. He has spent the last month in the United States.
Some have speculated that Sanader will use his return to gather strength and attempt a political comeback after he stepped down as PM in 2009.
The fact that Sanader intervened in the bank at least 13 times was uncovered by the heads of the Hypo Alpe Adria bank in a report on the banks status they were obliged to send to the Austrian national bank. Events surrounding the bank, following many years of agony that were marred by various scandals, ignited an unbelievable drama in Austria only a few days ago. At the end of the dramatic sequence of events it was decided that the bank would returned to state ownership, and that prior to this all of its co-owners would have to deposit onto the banks account hundreds of millions of euro, but also that some of the losses would be recuperated from the Austrian taxpayer through the state budget. That was the primary reason for establishing the Soko Hypo special investigation unit, which will be comprised of ten financial and business experts. The unit could finally shed some light on the numerous suspicious business transactions of the Hypo Alpe Adria bank, in which, at various levels, a number of influential Croatians, led by former Prime Minister Ivo Sanader, Ivic Pasalic and Vladimir Zagorec, were involved. When reporting on the issue, the Austrian media have begun using the opportune acronym K.u.K. - Kroatien und Korruption (Croatia and corruption). In Austria the dramatic outcome of the Hypo Alpe Adria bank crisis, created an altogether new situation, which could assist Croatian authorities in the search for money stolen from funds intended for Croatia's defence. Because of the bank's large losses in Austria, previous investigations had already been initiated, but the circumstances were somewhat different. Informed financial circles in Austria confirmed for Nacional that during those investigations there may have been some calculating, so as to not directly harm Austrian interests, and the Hypo Alpe Adria bank's business in Austria, as well as in Croatia. An Austrian political source confirmed for Nacional that these circumstances are different this time around. It is predicted that the special investigation unit will, this time around, not calculate at all in its investigation of illegalities, specifically with regards to those connected to the bank's business dealings in Croatia. Nacional learned from informed legal sources that last week the competent Austrian institutions once again contacted the Croatia State Attorney's Office, in an effort to intensify cooperation that is ongoing since the extradition of Vladimir Zagorec as a result of the gem scandal. A date has not yet been set as to when Soko Hypo representatives will meet with representatives from the Croatian State Attorney's Office, but it will happen very quickly. "We agreed to intensify our already good cooperation and concluded that the issue in question is very serious, in which we must reciprocally assist one another, because that is the only way to bring things to a conclusion. Our Austrian colleagues told us that they too could not complete their investigations without Croatian assistance, and we informed them that we could not resolve some of our open issues without Austrian help. We cannot do this individually, both sides are aware of this, and now we can begin to talk of the launch of a new phase of cooperation, which will certainly lead to good results," an informed legal source in Croatia told Nacional.
That was the primary reason for establishing the Soko Hypo special investigation unit, which will be comprised of ten financial and business experts. The unit could finally shed some light on the numerous suspicious business transactions of the Hypo Alpe Adria bank, in which, at various levels, a number of influential Croatians, led by former Prime Minister Ivo Sanader, Ivic Pasalic and Vladimir Zagorec, were involved. When reporting on the issue, the Austrian media have begun using the opportune acronym K.u.K. - Kroatien und Korruption (Croatia and corruption). In Austria the dramatic outcome of the Hypo Alpe Adria bank crisis, created an altogether new situation, which could assist Croatian authorities in the search for money stolen from funds intended for Croatia's defence. Because of the bank's large losses in Austria, previous investigations had already been initiated, but the circumstances were somewhat different. Informed financial circles in Austria confirmed for Nacional that during those investigations there may have been some calculating, so as to not directly harm Austrian interests, and the Hypo Alpe Adria bank's business in Austria, as well as in Croatia. An Austrian political source confirmed for Nacional that these circumstances are different this time around. It is predicted that the special investigation unit will, this time around, not calculate at all in its investigation of illegalities, specifically with regards to those connected to the bank's business dealings in Croatia.
Nacional learned from informed legal sources that last week the competent Austrian institutions once again contacted the Croatia State Attorney's Office, in an effort to intensify cooperation that is ongoing since the extradition of Vladimir Zagorec as a result of the gem scandal. A date has not yet been set as to when Soko Hypo representatives will meet with representatives from the Croatian State Attorney's Office, but it will happen very quickly. "We agreed to intensify our already good cooperation and concluded that the issue in question is very serious, in which we must reciprocally assist one another, because that is the only way to bring things to a conclusion. Our Austrian colleagues told us that they too could not complete their investigations without Croatian assistance, and we informed them that we could not resolve some of our open issues without Austrian help. We cannot do this individually, both sides are aware of this, and now we can begin to talk of the launch of a new phase of cooperation, which will certainly lead to good results," an informed legal source in Croatia told Nacional.
But that's right now. Question is : What happens next ?
Can the US govt successfully smuggle through the conceit that the foreclosures must continue because the little people defaulted on their loans and, irrespective of all the bothersome regulations that they don't like anyway, so they gotta lose their homes and we'll sort out the real ownership later ?
Or will the legal tangle about the primacy of title and ownership actually sink the ship ? keep to the Fen Causeway
And that isn't even the real issue. The real issue is that, as I understand it, if you can't produce the note, then the MBSes don't legally exist.
So the assets don't exist. So the creditworthiness isn't there anymore. And presumably there's leveraging involved here. And credit moves trigger options in other deals.
And those are just the cases where they thought they were putting out legitimate MBSes. Which it now seems they were not (seriously, read that).
So, yeah, I'm thinking this is pretty much Armageddon. Be nice to America. Or we'll bring democracy to your country.
But I can't help thinking that the pols are just as aware of the abyss yawning below and are gonna force a fix through that will save the system, however much they tear a hole in the Constitution or the very concept of the rule of law. I can just imagine the form of the justifications;-
it's the American way that if you fall behind in your payments you lose your home,
never mind you were sold a pup by fraudsters who couldn't even be bothered to do the paperwork to prove you owe them a brass farthing, it's buyer beware.
you're poor, you're weak and America is only for the strong. Survival of the fittest is what makes America great and the weak fall by the wayside.
I can go only like that for ages. the system has been rigged for years, it's time for it to come out of the shadows keep to the Fen Causeway
Sure, 25% of the populate is still pissed we have a black president and they're the same people who believe in America as a land of survival of the fittest. The other 75% want the banks to burn in hell.
you are the media you consume.
The other 75% want the banks to burn in hell.
and they're mad as hell and will vote Tea Party ... ah well, never mind keep to the Fen Causeway
So the SUpreme Court will get involved... By laying out pros and cons we risk inducing people to join the debate, and losing control of a process that only we fully understand. - Alan Greenspan
The closer the politicians get to the local level the more the the more the public holds them accountable, IMO, and the banks don't own the state houses the way they own Washington.
Of all the passivity in the face of erosion of freedom during the Bush years - those losses were entirely abstract for the majority of the population. Americans have never lived under Franco or Pinochet. This is different - losing your home because the bank feels like taking it is 100% real and drops a nuclear bomb on the social contract.
It's not possible for two banks to foreclose on the same house without fraud. It's not possible to foreclose on someone who didn't have a mortgage without fraud.
Even in the cases where we actually are talking about merely flawed paperwork (and those are by no stretch all the cases, I'll bet), you can't have these technical problems without systemic fraud. Be nice to America. Or we'll bring democracy to your country.
This is like enclosure, the clearings or any other historical land grab.
Wikipedia:
The process of enclosure has sometimes been accompanied by force, resistance, and bloodshed, and remains among the most controversial areas of agricultural and economic history in England. Marxist and neo-Marxist historians argue that rich landowners used their control of state processes to appropriate public land for their private benefit. This created a landless working class that provided the labour required in the new industries developing in the north of England. For example: "In agriculture the years between 1760 and 1820 are the years of wholesale enclosure in which, in village after village, common rights are lost".[1] "Enclosure (when all the sophistications are allowed for) was a plain enough case of class robbery"
The difference this time is that the left-overs will become vagrant and useless. There's nothing for them to do, except steal and deal.
And given that politically the choice is between Obama, whose take-down of the bankers lacks a certain enthusiasm, and some right-wing wacko with mental health issues - pick any one from the badgers-with-rabies bag of bonkers candidates - a new vagrant class dying in ditches is the most likely outcome.
State AGs can only push it up to the Supremes. And we know whose side they're on.
Unfortunately for the bankers, what's more likely to happen is that they'll start suing each other at some point. That's when it's going to get interesting.
But I don't have much optimism in bottom-up legal challenges, because that whole due process thing has been a joke in the US since Gitmo, at least. This development is just the director's cut for domestic release.
Theoretically they could push it to the Supreme Court, but even if the winger justices wanted to do a land grab (Tenth Amendment be damned), I don't think they have the votes. There isn't any law to work off for the feds as far as the foreclosures go.
The MBSs, perhaps.
Most likely, I think, is SCOTUS will want no part of this. As you know, SCOTUS's first reaction on an issue the public is well aware of is to run away as quickly as it can. You'll get them to finally make an opinion known on same-sex marriage before this. Be nice to America. Or we'll bring democracy to your country.
Amid a snowballing foreclosure fraud crisis, President Obama today blocked legislation that critics say could have made it more difficult for homeowners to challenge foreclosure proceedings against them. The bill passed the Senate with unanimous consent and with no scrutiny by the DC media. In a maneuver known as a "pocket veto," President Obama indirectly vetoed the legislation by declining to sign the bill passed by Congress while legislators are on recess. ... The swift passage and the president's subsequent veto of this bill come on the heels of an announcement that Wall Street banks are voluntarily suspending foreclosure proceedings in 23 states.
The bill passed the Senate with unanimous consent and with no scrutiny by the DC media. In a maneuver known as a "pocket veto," President Obama indirectly vetoed the legislation by declining to sign the bill passed by Congress while legislators are on recess.
...
The swift passage and the president's subsequent veto of this bill come on the heels of an announcement that Wall Street banks are voluntarily suspending foreclosure proceedings in 23 states.
But you would expect there to have been a quorum and the minutes of the session to record who was present, wouldn't you? By laying out pros and cons we risk inducing people to join the debate, and losing control of a process that only we fully understand. - Alan Greenspan
So, I'd say as long as nobody questioned it and under Unanimous Consent it was passed under the Rules of the Senate. Ever since I learnt about confirmation bias I've started seeing it everywhere
It is also revealing of the skin-deep support for this measure that Obama vetoed this and the Senate didn't pass it again.
So, what happened, was the motion snuck in by some bank hack, and approved by "yeah, whatever", until someone at the White House actually read it and figured it might not be such a good idea?
Also, this veto adds some nuance to Krugman's
True to form, the Obama administration's response has been to oppose any action that might upset the banks, like a temporary moratorium on foreclosures while some of the issues are resolved. Instead, it is asking the banks, very nicely, to behave better and clean up their act. I mean, that's worked so well in the past, right?
The legislation passes unanimously, but without an actual vote (just by "no objection to unanimous consent").
In parliamentary procedure, unanimous consent, also known as general consent, or in the case of the parliaments under the Westminster system, leave of the house, is a situation in which no one present objects to a proposal. The chair may state, for instance: "If there is no objection, the motion will be adopted. [pause] Since there is no objection, the motion is adopted" or in Westminster parliaments, "There being no objection, leave is granted." On the most routine matters, such as inserting an article into the Congressional Record, the chair may shorten this statement to four words: "Without objection, so ordered" or even to two words: "Without objection." If no member objects the motion is adopted, but if any member does declare his opposition the motion is not adopted and cannot be agreed to without a vote.
A pocket veto is a legislative maneuver in United States federal lawmaking that allows the President to indirectly veto a bill. The U.S. Constitution requires the President to sign or veto any legislation placed on his desk within ten days (not including Sundays) while the United States Congress is in session. From the U.S. Constitution Article 1, Section 7 states:If any Bill shall not be returned by the President within ten days (Sundays excepted) after it shall have been presented to him, the same shall be a Law, in like manner as if he had signed it, unless the Congress by their Adjournment prevent its return, in which case it shall not be a Law.If the President does not sign the bill within the required time period, the bill becomes law by default. However, the exception to this rule is if Congress adjourns before the ten days have passed and the President has not yet signed the bill. In such a case, the bill does not become law; it is effectively, if not actually, vetoed.
If any Bill shall not be returned by the President within ten days (Sundays excepted) after it shall have been presented to him, the same shall be a Law, in like manner as if he had signed it, unless the Congress by their Adjournment prevent its return, in which case it shall not be a Law.
In other words, both the Congress and the White House are scared out of their wits and doing stupid shit they are not convinced about. By laying out pros and cons we risk inducing people to join the debate, and losing control of a process that only we fully understand. - Alan Greenspan
In the end, we are probably thinking of this as a problem for the monied classes, when it is probably just another chess move in the game of squeezing all the assets out of the middle class. They probably don't see any of these marbles dropping on the floor as a problem at all.
Thus, the answer is, "Which ship?" Certainly not the one that they are on.
U.S. Constitution: Article I Clause 18. Necessary and Proper Clause The Congress shall have Power To lay and collect Taxes, Duties, Imposts and Excises, to pay the Debts and provide for the common Defence and general Welfare of the United States; but all Duties, Imposts and Excises shall be uniform throughout the United States;
bla bla bla
To make all Laws which shall be necessary and proper for carrying into Execution the foregoing Powers, and all other Powers vested by this Constitution in the Government of the United States, or in any Department or Officer thereof.
Article 2 Clause 2 Bla bla...but the Congress may by Law vest the Appointment of such inferior Officers, as they think proper, in the President alone, in the Courts of Law, or in the Heads of Departments.
And thus is the basis for the whateverthefucktheywanttodotoprotecttheirdonorsClause Never underestimate their intelligence, always underestimate their knowledge.
Frank Delaney ~ Ireland
Another market crash led by a slaughter of the financials, that's what's next.
Unless Obama pulls a TARP within days. By laying out pros and cons we risk inducing people to join the debate, and losing control of a process that only we fully understand. - Alan Greenspan
So we have a step forward in analyzing your equation.
;-) Ever since I learnt about confirmation bias I've started seeing it everywhere
Is nonconformity and freethinking a mental illness? According to the newest addition of the DSM-IV (Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders), it certainly is. The manual identifies a new mental illness called "oppositional defiant disorder" or ODD. Defined as an "ongoing pattern of disobedient, hostile and defiant behavior," symptoms include questioning authority, negativity, defiance, argumentativeness, and being easily annoyed. The DSM-IV is the manual used by psychiatrists to diagnose mental illnesses and, with each new edition, there are scores of new mental illnesses. Are we becoming sicker? Is it getting harder to be mentally healthy? Authors of the DSM-IV say that it's because they're better able to identify these illnesses today. Critics charge that it's because they have too much time on their hands. New mental illnesses identified by the DSM-IV include arrogance, narcissism, above-average creativity, cynicism, and antisocial behavior.
(my bold) Any idiot can face a crisis - it's day to day living that wears you out.
Although the creator of DSM-III had this to say about the secrecy with which DSM-5 is being drafted:
Robert Spitzer, the head of the DSM-III task force, has publicly criticized the APA for mandating that DSM-5 task force members sign a nondisclosure agreement, effectively conducting the whole process in secret: "When I first heard about this agreement, I just went bonkers."
above-average creativity
that is absolutely the most terrifying disease, one we should all fear and medicate into oblivion!
how can we hope for the triumph of the banal and victory of the mediocre unless we scythe these 'tall poppies' down to the level of the honest weeds that thrive around our ankles?
get treatment early and often, until your creativity comes down to a readout tolerably close to zero. only then you too can raise the proud banner of sanity and feel normal.
a rapid jump from vonnegut straight into huxley world... It's a fine line between homage, parody, and consumer opportunism. Jess Walter
A little snow fell last night in Borgå - gone by 09.30. You can't be me, I'm taken
...which turned up on my youngest's facebook status.
There's hope for him yet.
Brilliant quality recording. "The future is already here -- it's just not very evenly distributed" William Gibson
My phone camera obviously has a faster refresh rate than my eye, but it also doesn't to a continuous exposure like film would... By laying out pros and cons we risk inducing people to join the debate, and losing control of a process that only we fully understand. - Alan Greenspan
The retraction was published in Thursday's issue of Nature and is signed by the senior author, Amy J. Wagers, and two others. They say that serious concerns, which they did not specify, have undermined their confidence in the original report. ... Dr. Wagers issued a statement saying that she had immediately brought the disturbing information to the attention of Nature and the Harvard Medical School, and that she was working to repeat the experiments. She said by e-mail that the information came to light in the course of studies in her laboratory, prompting her to re-examine the reported data. ... Dr. Wagers has expressed her doubts about a second paper co-authored with Dr. Mayack and published in the journal Blood in August 2008. In a statement issued today, the journal said it was posting a "Notice of Concern" about the paper pending further review.
Dr. Wagers issued a statement saying that she had immediately brought the disturbing information to the attention of Nature and the Harvard Medical School, and that she was working to repeat the experiments. She said by e-mail that the information came to light in the course of studies in her laboratory, prompting her to re-examine the reported data.
Dr. Wagers has expressed her doubts about a second paper co-authored with Dr. Mayack and published in the journal Blood in August 2008. In a statement issued today, the journal said it was posting a "Notice of Concern" about the paper pending further review.
Kudos to Dr. Wagers and the other authors for their intellectual honesty. Ever since I learnt about confirmation bias I've started seeing it everywhere
His co-author, Ivan Oransky, said many of the retractions involved post-doctoral students who produced unreliable data. It is not clear whether the competitive nature of science puts pressure on the students to cut corners, or whether the laboratory chief creates an atmosphere that induces cheating, Dr. Oransky said.
TED | Steven Johnson: Where Good Ideas Come Ever since I learnt about confirmation bias I've started seeing it everywhere
"Mets vite la tele sur TF1; des ravisseurs viennent d'enlever sarkozy et demande une tres forte somme d'argent en echange! Si on ne paye pas il menace de le bruler avec de l'essence! On organise donc une quette nationale. Tu donne combien? 10 ou 20 litres d'essence?" Hey, Grandma Moses started late!
by Migeru - Jun 15 64 comments
by Frank Schnittger - Jun 17 20 comments
by Katrin - Jun 12 88 comments
by Jerome a Paris - Jun 9 68 comments
by DoDo - Jun 9 22 comments
by Zwackus - Jun 11 64 comments
by Metatone - Jun 8 4 comments
by Ted Welch - Jun 3 1 comment
by Frank Schnittger - Jun 1720 comments
by Migeru - Jun 1564 comments
by Katrin - Jun 1288 comments
by DoDo - Jun 1126 comments
by Zwackus - Jun 1164 comments
by Jerome a Paris - Jun 968 comments
by DoDo - Jun 922 comments
by Metatone - Jun 84 comments
by DoDo - Jun 671 comments
by DoDo - Jun 418 comments
by Ted Welch - Jun 31 comment
by gmoke - Jun 211 comments
by Frank Schnittger - May 3113 comments
by A swedish kind of death - May 3113 comments
by ceebs - May 2927 comments
by ARGeezer - May 2915 comments
by Zwackus - May 271 comment
by DoDo - May 2631 comments
by DoDo - May 2346 comments
by Metatone - May 1490 comments