John Punko and Juel Stanton

Is John Punko slated for termination next? Why would they do that? Before they make up another bullshit excuse like they did for Juel Stanton, Geoff Meisner and Britney Irving lets find out the real reason.

OK maybe they didn't make up a lie about Britney. Maybe they really were dumb enough to think she was the rat for the Hells Angels grow op she lived on that was busted. She didn't obviously but it is possible they were dumb enough to think she did. Let's give them the benefit of the doubt and say Britney was a mistake. Yet blaming Joey and saying if Joey did it he's no longer our friend is bullshit as well. Only a rat would do that.

Geoff did not steal a large shipment of pot from the Hells Angels. That didn't happen. Nor did he steal someone's cocaine and pocket the profit. That isn't what happened. We really need to stop and question these lies before we blindly believe them. Like how they claimed Joey Arrance raped someone's girlfriend. That didn't happen either. Even if he did, which he didn't, that wouldn't justify murdering his girlfriend's mother. That was really messed up.

They say the first casualty of war is the truth. So too with the Vancouver gang war. Murder and betrayal justified with lies. False statements. Someone said Juel Stanton was involved with the Pickton murders and that's why he was killed. They claimed his death ended the Hells Angels connection to the Pickton murders. Bullshit. First, I don't think he was personally involved and second, that in no way ended the Hells Angels involvement in that case.

Piggy Palace was a Haney Hells Angels hang out. That's the chapter than run the Maple Ridge grow ops where dead bodies have been found. The Hells Angels involvement in that case was not limited to one person. Even Dave Pickton was a Hells Angels associate.

So my next question is, why would they lie about Stanton like that? Make up some bullshit reason for killing him so no one questions it. Perhaps. That's worked many times before I suppose. Yet you can fool some of the people some of the time but you can't fool all of the people all of the time.

Some said Stanton was too violent and was beating up crack addicts for drug debts in the Ivanhoe. That's exactly what Tony Terezakis did just up the street at the American Hotel and across the street at the Cobalt. Only Tony actually filmed himself doing it. That wasn't very bright.

Juel Stanton and his brother were robbing grow ops and taking them over for the Hells Angels. They were on company business. Betraying him like they did was somewhat bizarre. Stanton was a scrapper. Kinda like Punko. They were rough and tumble the real deal. They weren't these plastic Merle Norman eyebrow man purse wielding fairies.

Stanton's charges weren't significant. Punkos are. Since Punko's conviction was overturned they might well kill him just to avoid getting criminal org status in BC for the first time. Wouldn't that be rat like.

Someone claimed that Stanton answered to Giles and that Giles was the one that ordered the end to his own soldier. They claimed there was a disclosure in Stanton's trial that proved to be quite enlightening and perhaps even made the police look bad. I suppose a lot of people didn't want that disclosure made public.

It revealed things about Stanton that Bryce didn't even know but Giles did. That was kind of the shocker. We all know that everything in the Hells Angels is on a need to know basis, but why would Giles keep secrets from Bryce? The source claims after that disclosure it was kinda hard for Bryce to trust Giles. No doubt. I sure wouldn't trust him or anyone else that so warmly embraced the Lennoxville Massacre.

Someone else claimed that they killed Stanton because he was taking over grow ops owned by other Hells Angels in other chapters. Yet that doesn't really make sense. Why would he do that? Unless Giles was trying to move in to other areas owned by other chapters without telling Bryce and then had Stanton killed so everyone would think Stanton was acting on his own not under Giles' direction. Wouldn't that be a conspiracy. There are lots of theories about why they killed Stanton. I don't accept the official version.

Charges in 2008 Dudley-McKay Murder

I am relieved to hear that charges have finally be laid in the Dudley-McKay Murder. It was a tragedy that Lisa was left dying in her home after reports of shots fired were made four days earlier. Keep in mind the person that called it in didn't dial 911 they called the non emergency number first as they weren't completely sure it was gunfire they heard coming from the house. The officer investigating the call did make a mistake which I'm sure will haunt him for the rest of his life. A real tragedy indeed.

We do need to remember that the police officer wasn't the one who shot her. That point seems to have been missed. The police said at the time it was a targeted shooting. They have arrested a suspect and said the motive will come out during the trial. Along with motive would be affiliation. If it was a targeted murder there had to have been an affiliation tied to the motive.

One anonymous reader on Kim Bolan's blog claimed the suspect is a member of the Renegades who are a Hells Angels puppet club in Prince George. That would be unconfirmed hearsay at this point yet all leads are worth investigating. The news claims the suspect was from Surrey.

Guthrie didn't ride a Harley he rode a sports bike. Yet Hells Angels were said to have attended their children's fundraiser in 2009. Now there is absolutely nothing wrong with the Hells Angels attending a funeral or a fundraiser. Unless of course it's for someone they had killed. That would be somewhat bizarre.

Another body in the Lake

Speaking of getting back to reality, another body was found in the Okanagan lake at Kelowna today. The last one found under the dock at the marina was Catherine Hayley Wright. Foul play was ruled out by the corner. Perhaps they're claiming it was a suicide. I don't understand how someone can jump off a floating bridge in an attempt to commit suicide. I don't think that's high enough off the ground to do the trick. Strange things did go on at that marina.

There was a drug bust there that resulted in BC's first successful criminal organization charges. They were selling drugs out of that marina on behalf of a criminal organization. The court didn't actually name the criminal organization but we know that drug ring did bring cocaine to the Hells Angels clubhouse in Kelowna.

We know that Geoff Meisner is still missing. So is Aaron Derbyshire as well as a few others. Not all appear to be gang or drug related but the number of missing people is disturbing.

On a strange note, New York Rangers enforcer Derek Boogaard has been found dead in his apartment. Derek was 28.

Back to Reality

Although May appears to be political corruption month on the gangsters out blog, it's time to return to our primary focus and that is the Vancouver Gang War. Political and white collar corruption does affect us. Looking into the vortex of coruption as described by Al Martin can indeed be overwhelming. Yet there are simple wrongs that stare us in the face every day in our own communities. Two names I will cite that have connection to the Hells Angels and the crime that plagues our smaller cities are Russell Penner and Ryan Chappie. What concerns me is the iron grip the Hells Angels have on the drug trade in East Vancouver and their subsequent liability for the drug related violence there including but not limited to pushing Native women out of windows for drug debts. What concerns me is how this absolute control of the drug trade in Prince George has resulted in a great deal of drug related violence including but not limited to a gang rape at a Hells angels puppet clubhouse and the murder of a former associates girlfriend's mother who was wheelchair bound and burned to death in her own home. These evil acts will not continue noticed. They tie in with the murder and betrayal of Britney Irving and Geoff Meisner in Kelowna. The ultimate liability for the violent betrayal of former associates is clearly the Hells angels. It started with the Lenoxville massacre and it never stopped. Hells Angel Jeff Lynds confessed to murdering Randy Mersereau with a gun provided by the Hells Angels. That confession has opened the door to the investigation of Rusty Hall's betrayal and murder. Murdering a brother, then denying it and attending their funeral is the lowest kind of rat there is. Reporting a murder to the police is not being a rat. Turning the other way is.

Oil Companies suing the government

With all this talk about the government suing the oil companies over the price of gas let's take a peak at times the oil companies have sued the government and why that makes over reaching trade agreements so dangerous.

Recently, Alaskan oil companies have sued the government for handing too much land to polar bears. I kid you not.

The thought is rather absurd. A democratically elected government can make parks and protected habitat all it wants. Yet not when we hand over those democratic rights over to tribunals in over reaching trade agreements like NAFTA, TILMA and the NAU.

Two U.S. oil companies are suing Canada for $60 million under NAFTA’s Chapter 11, because the Newfoundland government is demanding that part of their research and development (R&D) budget be spent in the province.

The Council of Canadians explain that under NAFTA’s Chapter 11, foreign investors sue governments over public measures like environmental protection, public health protection and the delivery of public services if they interfere with their profits. These cases are not adjudicated by Canadian courts, but by secretive trade tribunals.

This does not give any consideration to the country’s laws, commitments to social programs, and environmental, labour or human rights. By giving foreign investors the right to claim damages when government measures interfere with profits, NAFTA has empowered private tribunals to resolve public policy disputes. The result is that foreign companies may use NAFTA freely to challenge public policies and laws they oppose.

So what happens when a corporation sues the government under NAFTA and loses? It rewrites the agreement so that it will win next time. That is what we see with TILMA and the NAU. TILMA is a trade agreement between the provinces that makes it illegal for any level of government to create a law that will inhibit a corporation's ability to make a profit. The same with the wording of the NAU. Oh I mean the security prosperity partnership.

If we want to create a law that protects the environment, we can't. We just signed away that right. So when a private company wants to make a profit by dumping nuclear waste in Canada they can sue us if we try and stop them because protecting the environment would inhibit their ability to make a profit. I kid you not. These are serious issues being signed away in back rooms as we sleep.

Government intervention in the rising price of gas

In the news we hear both the American and the Canadian governments are summoning the large oil companies to explain why the price of gas is so high at the pump when they are making billions in profits and get billions in tax exemptions. Well isn’t that ironic?

First we create a giant blood sucking monster mandated to rip people off, then we act all surprised when they do what they are mandated to do. Rip people off and make more and more profit. It is a theatrical production to appease voters and play Pontius Pilate.

The price at the pump at mid-week had risen nearly 6% in less than 72 hours, while crude oil prices had fallen by nearly 14% in the previous 10 days.

Private corporations only care about one thing – profit. They are mandated to not only make a profit but to always increase the amount of profit they make to meet the ever increasing demands of the shareholder. Corporations don’t care about consumers. The only time corporations care about consumers is when supply and demand says the consumer can go somewhere else which would reduce their profit margin. When there is a monopoly on the market that is not publicly accountable, consumers don’t matter.

In a sense there isn’t a monopoly on the oil market, it’s just that the big oil companies have ganged up on the consumer. When we had a gas war supply and demand reduced the price of gas at the pump. Now the gas war is over. Some companies will automatically set their price of gas at a few cents below what everyone else is charging. Everyone else just accepted that and kept charging more and more so the companies that would undercut them were only under cutting them by a marginal amount.

In 1911 the Supreme Court stepped in when the Rockefellers tried to buy up all the oil companies and create a monopoly. They introduced legislation allowing smaller oil companies to exist. Which in essence just paved the way for all the oil fraud the Bush family were so entrenched in.

Yet when the large oil companies are making so much excessive profit and they refuse to reduce the price of gas at the pump, then it is with merit to discuss government intervention. Oh but can a government intervene in a private market? They can when they rip people off. There are two avenues to go.

We can’t sue them and take them to court because they haven’t broken any laws. We could create a law to force them to drop the price of gas at the pump and start paying some corporate tax. The other avenue would be to nationalize the oil industry. Wouldn’t that be extreme? Look at how they slandered the Mexican president who nationalized their oil. They slandered him to his grave and beyond. Yet the Mexican people have benefited from his efforts.

Nationalizing the oil may sound extreme, but look at all the good that could be accomplished. Fair prices is one thing but think about the number of schools, hospitals and mri scans some of those profits could pay for? Certainly we don’t want to overburden the private sector with excessive corporate tax. Yet if the large corporations are making large profits, then they should be paying some tax. Not taxing the large corporations but taxing individual families is unjust. Natural justice declares that everyone does their civic duty and pays their fair share of tax. This is how we balance budgets. This is how we pay down the debt. This is how we build schools and hospitals. This is how we provide social programs like universal healthcare.

The Financial Post claims There's not much any government can do to control the price of gasoline at the pumps. That's not entirely true. All the payday loan companies, although privately owed are all subject to the laws in place. In BC the maximum they can charge for a payday loan is 23% so that is exactly what they charge. They charge 23% for a two week loan which is really 46% per month but we won't get into technicalities. Much.

The point is the government can create laws and intervene when private companies get carried away with greed. Standard Oil was the largest oil refiner in the world until it was broken up by the United States Supreme Court in 1911.

Pension Theft

Front page of the Globe and Mail today had the headline Pensions. The article quotes some numbers and then comes up with a very disturbing conclusion. They say that more than half of the country’s pensioned workers are in jobs in the civil service or at government-funded institutions such as universities and hospitals.

They then proceed to claim "While job losses in hard-hit sectors have helped to drive down the number of employees with pension plans, many companies have also looked to cut costs by eliminating so-called defined benefit plans – which pay the worker a guaranteed income upon retirement – for new employees at least."

They are claiming that since the number of Canadian workers with pensions have decreased in the private sector compared to the public sector companies are trying to eliminate pensions to cut costs and imply that public sector employees should consider also taking the roll back to their pensions.

That's like saying there's a bank robber loose and since he has robbed half the banks, everyone else should give up their savings too. Pensions are sacred. The Corporate trend of eliminating pensions to cuts costs is a clear example of how fucked up our society has become.

Aside from the fact that they fudged their numbers. “It comes back to an employment story more than a pension story,” said Paul Forestell, senior partner at pension consulting firm Mercer. “Jobs disappeared, so there are fewer people working in manufacturing in the private sector. It’s not necessarily that [pension] plans disappeared, there’s just less people employed there.”

Yet in October of 2009 the Globe and Mail ran another article entitled Bankrupt companies, pension promises destroyed. That article states that there are 17.6 million people in the Canadian work force and that 11 million Canadian workers are without pension plans. That is not a good thing. We should be encouraging pensions not discouraging them.

Yet the Globe and Mail have just run another article about pensions entitled: Messing with politicians’ pensions can have unintended consequences.

They claim that messing with a politician's pension is taboo. Then why is it fair game to steal everyone else's pension? Answer: It's not. Canada’s aging work force hasn’t saved enough to retire. Pension benefits are being slashed, employees are working longer, the elderly are selling their homes and going back to work. This is not a good thing. Trying to encourage companies to steal pensions to cut costs is just plain wrong.

Huntsville and the Vortex of Corruption

Huntsville, Alabama and beside it Redstone Arsenal is a large hub where military weapons are manufactured. Al Martin calls it Corruption City, USA. (page 362) Martin describes how an investigation team was sent in to Redstone with some accountants and found there was a great deal of missing material and no record of any payments to account for the losses. Martin claims the "discrepancy" at the Huntsville military complex was $16 billion.

Shocking as this allegation is, it clearly falls within the realm of believability when we hear the warnings from Donald Rumsfeld the day before 9/11. On that day he said the Pentagon was missing $2.3 trillion dollars. Trillion. That is a huge amount of money and as we all know where ever there is that kind of money to be made, criminals will kill for it.

Martin claims the heart of the scheme was to sell military weapons to embargoed countries through a variety of artifices and cut-out nations. We've already talked about Trans World Armaments of Montreal tied to Brian Mulroney which was used in Iran Contra to ship arms to Nicaragua.

Ya see there's two things on the table. One is selling military weapons to both sides of a conflict to simply make a profit for the military or for the Corporations that manufacture the weapons. The other is stealing from the military to simply make a profit for oneself. The latter would explain why so much money has gone missing. People in positions of trust are stealing from the military to line their own pockets.

It's kind of hard to rationalize how stealing from the military is somehow done for God and Country. One could, in a very twisted way, rationalize selling cocaine out of Mena Arkansas to help supply the Contras in Nicaragua with weapons with an end justifies the means argument. They could claim they are doing that bad thing to fight a greater evil, which is the threat of Godless Communism.

Yes it is very twisted and insane, yet there is a fragment of a rationalization one could theoretically cling to. Yet there is no fragment of rationalization to cling to when you are stealing arms from the military and selling it to embargoed countries to make a profit for yourself and line your own pocket with stolen cash. Stolen tax dollars. That act isn't even conflicted. It is outright theft.

Of course the criminals in charge say the answer is to privatize the military and remove all public accountability whatsoever so the public never again hears a number of how much money is missing from military spending. Thus Blackwater and the private Corporate Mercenary Army was created and the Clone Wars have begun.

Bin Laden's death fuels conspiracy theories

The Vancouver Province recently ran an article by Les MacPherson about how Bin Laden's death has fueled conspiracy theories. The first conspiracy theory he addresses is the thought that Osama is still alive. To that charge I'd have to agree with his claim that it would be highly unlikely for President Obama to risk the embarrassment of announcing Osama's death if he was still alive only to find a new video from a living Osama. I just don't think Osama had anything to do with 9/11.

The article states that posting pictures of a dead Osama wouldn't matter because Conspiracy theorists would only claim the photos are faked. The shadows aren't right, they would say, just like they say about the thousands of photos and miles of video footage of astronauts on the moon.

Yes photos can be easily faked and yes they can make pretty realistic masks of anyone. However, comparing that to claims of the moonwalk being faked is quite a stretch. After all the original bin Laden "confession" video didn't look anything like bin Laden. It wasn't a matter of the shadows not being right. It was simply a matter of being an entirely different person in the video.

"Conspiracy theorists, however, by definition, can never be convinced. They'll say bin Laden won't be appearing in any more videos because he's in on the conspiracy." Well that's a possibility. Everyone else in bin Laden's family were extremely cosy with the Bush family and donated millions to their political campaigns and oil fraud company. Osama was at one point a CIA asset.

Nevertheless, MacPherson goes on to state: "It is the malignant nature of a conspiracy theory that all evidence confirms the theory. If there is no evidence whatsoever, the theory concludes it is too perfect. That's why people still insist that 9/11 was an inside job, that Oswald didn't shoot JFK, that an alien UFO crashed near Roswell, N.M. No amount of evidence can ever put to rest these enduring myths."

This is where I start to gag. MacPherson uttered the forbidden thesis, that some think that 9/11 was an inside job and that no amount of evidence can ever put to rest these enduring myths. The video of the assassination of Kennedy clearly shows he was shot from the front not the rear as claimed in the Warren Commission report. UFO's don't concern me but 9/11 does.

The most outrageous conspiracy theory I have ever heard is the claim that the third tower in New York fell due to heat and fire. That is not scientific. It defies reason. No planes hit the third tower. Other buildings closer to the twin towers withstood the impact of falling debris. The third tower collapsed into it's own blueprint at free fall speed just like a controlled demolition. They knew it was going to collapse before it fell. Larry Silverstein said they pulled the building.

To claim that the third tower fell in New York due to heat and fire is absolute nonsense. To claim that all the scientific evidence proves the third tower fell due to heat and fire is simply a false statement.

I could go into details about the numerous scientific flaws with the official story behind 9/11 and likely will. Yet the simple irony I find is why would Larry Silverstein buy the Twin Towers right after the Port Authority lost the court case to have the insurance companies pay for the asbestos removal they had been required to perform. Why would a businessman buy the twin towers knowing he had to pay for the removal of asbestos in the towers? That defies reason.

He sure profited from the disaster though. He sued the insurance company and claimed that since two planes hit the towers that constituted two terrorists attacks not one and demanded to be paid twice the maximum value of the insurance policy. He paid his mortgage and doubled the value of his investment as a result of the attack based on an insurance fraud.

Let's say I had a car worth $20,000 and I insured it for it's full value. Then let's say I get in a three car collision. Two cars run a red light and hit me from both sides. The fact that two cars hit me is not relevant. I had one car and I insured that car for it's full value. ICBC would not pay me twice the value of my car. Yet that is exactly what Larry Silverstien did. He insured the Twin Towers against a terrorist attack for the full value of the towers and was then paid out twice the value of the towers. That in my opinion is another example of insurance fraud. That's a fact, not a conspiracy theory.

The Double Scam and the Texas Bank Robbery

We've heard of double dipping but a double scam is something rather new. I'm not talking about a card trick. I'm talking about a stock swindle. We've talked about the Bush family's involvement with oil fraud.

Donors would invest in the fake oil field. They would be paid half their investment in the limited partnerships before they became insolvent. They got to write off the other half of their investment on a 2:1 leverage basis, which was perfectly legal under the lax laws at the time. The net effect was that they came out whole on an after tax basis.

That scam defrauded the American people out of tax revenue because the investors wrote off the loss in their fake company which meant a reduction in tax revenue to the government which had to be recovered from the average citizen.

The double scam is the same thing twice over. Al Martin used the following example: "I will use MCorp as an example, wherein a corporate artifice could be formed by Jeb Bush, let's say. Money could be borrowed from MCorp. The money would then be used to short (sell short, in other words) MCorp's stock. When the stock plummeted, the shares would be bought back at a large profit, and the original load itself would be defaulted on through the marginal, corporate entity that originally borrowed it, which most likely existed nowhere except in an attorney's file cabinet." (The Conspirators page 100)

I'm not sure I understand the selling short thing but I do understand defaulting on a bank loan through a fake corporation. BTW "In March 1989, when MCorp failed, is was the 36th largest banking entity in the United States. As the second largest banking entity in Texas, MCorp consisted of 25 banks, 86 banking offices, and 1 trust company, all located in Texas. The company had assets of $18 billion, and it's common stock was listed on the New York Stock Exchange M. MCorp had a reputation as one of the most progressive banking entities, in terms of both technology and personnel."

"MCorp suffered two straight years of quarterly operating losses beginning with the fourth quarter of 1986. The losses stemmed primarily from an increasing amount of nonperforming assets and loan charge-offs. The oil industry in Texas and the Southwest had collapsed."

They lost their money due to scams. It wasn't that the oil market dried up, It was the oil fraud that milked them dry. The test run for the big one was in 1989 when the government dished out $2 billion for MCorp alone.

Al Martin claims that there were three major Texas lending institutions which were very prominent in the Iran-Contra fraud and were, in fact, taken down by the fraud.These were Texas American Bancshares, then chaired by Bobby Corson, Allied Bancshares of Texas, then chaired by the infamous Walter Mischer, and thirdly, MCorp. (page 99)

These were the three largest savings and loans and/or chimerical banks in Texas in the mid-1980's. The combined losses in these institutions totaled some $5 billion. By 1988-8, these banks were, in fact, insolvent.

Mischer and Corson were later investigated by various Congressional committees as to the nature of unrepaid Iran-Contra loans. In some cases, these were some of the few groups of institutions where the CIA was directly involved.

In fact, by 1989, it was determined that the CIA had borrowed for illegal, covert operations some $350 million from these three intuitions. It also failed to repay that amount. These banks were involved principally in fraudulent Iran-Contra related profiteering - realm estate loans, oil and gas ventures, illegal securities transactions, ect.

Al Martin gives another specific example of the double fraud. One that he claims he himself did under the direction of Jeb Bush.

"What I did (as a matter of fact, Jeb Bush introduced me to the loan with certain provisios about where parts of the proceeds were to go later on ) is that I formed a separate shell known as Mar-Tech Industries. I borrowed $85,000 from MCorp through Dean Witter. Through the account that Mar-Tech controlled at Dean Witter, I was able to short 10,000 shares of MCorp preferred at varying prices between $8 and $8.50."

"Within three or four months, M-Corp preferred shares had fallen in value to $3. I then covered my 10,000m shares between $3 and $3.50 a share making approximately $50,000 profit. I then proceeded to dissolve Mar-Tech and defaulted on the original $85,000 loan, after having made two interest payments."

"I now has $135,000 in total profits, as you loosely describe $85,000 illicitly obtained from a fraudulent bank loan, or a bank loan that I obtained under fraudulent circumstances, plus $50,000 garnered through the short sale of said stock, essentially using the bank's own money to short the stock and then defaulting on the loan. Others did this in much larger quantity than I ever did." (page 101)

I'm not reposting this information to teach people how to scam the banks. I'm reposting it so the banks will see how they were scammed and that the Bush family were directly involved in all this which makes George Bush's visit to Surrey very problematic indeed. We do not want him to defraud our banks like he did in Texas.

Not that stock scams are anything new to Vancouver. In fact that is the reason we don't have a stock market any more. 60 Minutes did a special on the numerous fake companies that would rise on hype then crash when the directors took off to Florida for the summer only to come back in 6 months to do it all over again. This kind of investment fraud destabilizes the market, our economy and destroys hard earned pensions which is absolutely not acceptable.

Bailing out the banks after they have been defrauded is another example of the double scam. First they steal from the bank, then they steal from the tax payers. These are the real criminals. They are the real enemies of the state.



It appears they did the same thing in Denver. Neil Bush was on the Board of Directors for Silvderado Savings and Loan. That collapse cost tax payers $1 billion. Another report claims it was more like $1.4 trillion. Federal regulators accused Bush of conflict of interest. He was never charged criminally but he was sued. They settled out of court for $26.5 million and had a republican fundraiser to help Neil cover his portion of the costs.

Get this, the S&L crash was a result of puring money into Neil oil fraud called JNB Exploration. Over a period of five years JNB drilled over 25 wells in four States and didn't find a drop of oil. Neil started the company with two former coworkers who made Neil president. That's when Neil became a director of Silverado Savings and Loan and approved loans over a million dollars for his two partners. Somewhat conflicted indeed. Neil Bush helped cause Silverado to crash and get a huge bail out while he kept getting huge salary increases along the way.

Don't forger George Bush's oil fraud culminated in Harkern Energy. In 1990 George Bush sold of a large block of shares in that company right before the company reported a larger than expected loss for the previous quarter which trigger a substantial drop in the value of the stock. Bush was accused of insider trading.

Before Harken Energy the company was called Arbusto Energy and defrauded the bin Laden Family just like Sarkozy defrauded Gaddafi. It was revealed that Jim Bath made a $50,000 investment in Arbusto on behalf of Salem bin Ladden, Osama's brother who later died in an ultralight accident in Texas. However, Bill White claims the court documents revealed that the $25,000 dollar investment in 1979 and the $25,000 investment in 1980 was just Bath's commission and that the Saudis had actually invested over a million dollars.

Bush later got $25 million from Osama's brother in law for another oil company. White claims the Saudis would give brief cases of cash to the lawyers who would in turn put the money in Bush Sr.'s campaign fund. They got around the law banning foreign political contributions by giving the money to lawyers which was then protected by lawyer client privilege. Well kinda.

Don't forget that all these banking scams were made possiible because the banks were deregulated. The Depository Institutions Deregulation and Monetary Control Act of 1980 (DIDMCA) had phased out a number of restrictions on banks' financial practices, broadened their lending powers, and raised the deposit insurance limit from $40,000 to $100,000 (raising the problem of moral hazard). Banks rushed into real estate lending, speculative lending, and other ventures.

In July 1982, Congress enacted the Garn–St. Germain Depository Institutions Act of 1982 (Garn–St. Germain), which further deregulated banks as well as deregulating savings and loans. First they deregulated the banks, then they defrauded the banks and bailed them out with tax dollars. That is a double scam alright.

Yet the banks benefitted too. Removing restrictions on interest charges Canadian mortgage interest rates increased from a low of 10.31% in August of 1978 to a high of 21.46% in September of 1981 which doubled a family’s monthly mortgage payments and caused many foreclosures. Mortgage rates have since subsided but credit card rates haven’t despite such a drastic drop in the prime lending rate.