In the interest of disclosure, I personally own Wells Fargo common and some of their Convertible Preferred l shares.(See 1 below.)
---
I did not make this up but this is the sinister undercurrent AIPAC fights.
But then there are a growing number who agree with Stone and believe Israel is a threat to world peace.
They have succumbed to Arab/Muslim propaganda and the anti- Semetic influence of Carter, Gore's al Jazeera, Professor Mersheimer, Walsh etc.
Stone is not totally wrong in his comments about American Corporate sympathizers and the impact of the peace treaty imposed on Germany after WW 1 and its effect on their economy which paved the way for Hitler.
Stone is wrong in many regards, three glaring ones.
1) Yes more Russians were killed in WW 2 but as a per cent of their population that is not factual.
2) Nothing can explain away or assuage the behavior of the German people who were educated , elite Europeans except cowardliness and a deep seated sickness.
When an entire race can be turned into animals that is something I find inexcusable . That is how the Klan and The White Citizen Councils came to be in my beloved South. This is why hating Palestinians, Hamas, Hezballah and The Muslim Brotherhood etc, are a threat to world peace. and,
3) Finally, Stone is engaged in the PC approach used by progressives and liberals called relativism Relativism is used as a subtle tool to make horrible things palatable.
Relativism is what has lowered our morals and allows those, who embrace it, to move away from absolutes. There are some things, in my opinion, that are black and white and cannot be softened by discussing them in a relative sense. This is what distinguishes humans from animals.
Relativism provides a convenient cover for those who reject scientific facts and permits them to substitute their theories etc.
I refer you to David Mamet's: "The Secret Knowledge" as an interesting explanation from his perspective.
Oliver Stone has made several movies using history as a jumping board to which he then attaches his own theories. This is why the teaching of history is critically important and why our failure to do so makes the youth of this nation susceptible to propaganda. They have no factual background and thus their emotions are easily manipulated as were the youth of Germany.
Hitler understood and thus was able to create "The Brown Shirts" and this is what the Palestinians are about in their schools - the teaching of another generation of misguided haters which European and others, who wear their hearts on their sleeves, support with money.
You decide.
I prefer to stick with Tom Sowell. (See 2, 2a and 2b below.)
---
Dick
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
1)
Everything You Need to Know About the Stress Tests
For the first time, the Federal Reserve ran through the Dodd-Frank-mandated banking stress tests. That made what was a one-step stress-test process last year -- the Fed's Comprehensive Capital Analysis and Review -- a two-step process this year.
Both tests examine how bank balance sheets would hold up under the pressure of an extremely adverse economic scenario -- a scenario that this year included a severe recession in the U.S. combined with a housing market drop, rising unemployment, a global financial shock, and marked slowdowns in the eurozone, Japan, and the developing Asian countries. But while the CCAR looks at banks' capital plans -- which may include, for instance, raising dividends -- the Dodd-Frank tests assume consistent capital plans.
Ally Financial -- the former GMAC -- managed to fail the Dodd-Frank test pretty seriously. But it was alone in that feat. All of the other 17 banks tested had minimum stressed capital ratios that were comfortably above required minimums.
Of particular focus in these tests is the Tier 1 common ratio. The mandated minimum level by regulators -- which we could reasonably call the pass/fail line in these tests -- is 5%.
Some of the banks like Bank of New York Mellon (NYSE: BK ) and State Street, which are primarily banks for banks and maintain solid, low-risk balance sheets, breezed through the tests. Others, like Goldman Sachs (NYSE: GS ) and Morgan Stanley cut it a bit closer thanks to their trading portfolios and the hits they were expected to take in the hypothetical global financial shock.
Big banks Bank of America (NYSE: BAC ) and Citigroup (NYSE: C ) were probably the most watched -- and certainly the most talked about -- coming into the tests. Both banks passed the tests easily, though if one stood out as a particular surprise, it was Citi and its strong showing. Bank of America, meanwhile, though improving on its CCAR showing from last year, was perhaps more of a disappointment (particularly if you ask this Fool).
But investors in the individual banks will certainly want to get beyond the aggregates and take a closer look at the bank-by-bank results. To help with that, we've put together a cheat sheet for each bank that will help you get up to speed quickly on how each bank fared through the first round of stress testing.
Click on the name of the company to see the full breakdown:
| The Big Four | Regional Banks | Others |
| Bank of America | BB&T | American Express |
| Citigroup | Fifth Third | Bank of New York Mellon |
| JPMorgan Chase | KeyCorp | Capital One |
| Wells Fargo (NYSE: WFC ) | PNC Financial | Goldman Sachs |
| Regions Financial | Morgan Stanley | |
| SunTrust | State Street | |
| U.S. Bancorp |
In the end, if there's one key takeaway from the first round of stress tests, it's that the results suggest that the country's major banks could rack up close to $200 billion in losses and still maintain a median 7.7% tier 1 common ratio. That's a huge change from just a few years ago -- and a big relief.
Some readers may scoff at the tests and how much comfort they can give us. After all, what if the next shock-and-awe financial meltdown doesn't look like the one that the Fed has created here? While that's a reasonable view, it misses the bigger picture. Banks were able to come out the other side of these tests looking good largely because they simply have a lot more capital than they did in 2007.
A wooden house may fold under hurricane conditions, but if you bolster those walls with a brick backing, it can withstand a lot more. There's little doubt in my mind that bank balance sheets are in a very good place right now. If there's something to be worried about, it's not in the here and now. Instead, it's whether the banks will keep up that level of safety, or shuck it down the road for a shot at a fatter bottom line.
One big stress-test winner
Citigroup stood out as a big upside surprise in the first round of stress tests. Does that mean that investors should be jumping on an opportunity to buy? To help figure out whether Citigroup deserves a spot on your watch list, I invite you to read our premium research report on the bank today. We'll fill you in on both reasons to buy and reasons to sell Citigroup, and what areas that Citigroup investors need to watch going forward. Click here now for instant access to our best expert's take on Citigroup..
Citigroup stood out as a big upside surprise in the first round of stress tests. Does that mean that investors should be jumping on an opportunity to buy? To help figure out whether Citigroup deserves a spot on your watch list, I invite you to read our premium research report on the bank today. We'll fill you in on both reasons to buy and reasons to sell Citigroup, and what areas that Citigroup investors need to watch going forward. Click here now for instant access to our best expert's take on Citigroup..
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
2) Oliver Stone Puts Hitler in Perspective For Us!
His visit last year created much controversy and Huntsville's Jewish Federation, with consultation from The Birmingham Jewish Federation, did a great job of educating area leaders about Farrakhan's long record of anti-Semitism and hostility toward Jews. The BJF has connected Montgomery's Jewish Federation with Huntsville's in anticipation of the Farrakhan visit. (Tuskegee is about 40 miles from Montgomery.)
2) Oliver Stone Puts Hitler in Perspective For Us!
Outspoken Hollywood director says new film aims to put Adolf Hitler, who he has called an 'easy scapegoat' in the past, in his due historical context.
Jewish control of the media is preventing an open discussion of the Holocaust, prominent Hollywood director Oliver Stone told the Sunday Times, adding that the U.S. Jewish lobby was controlling Washington's foreign policy for years.
In the Sunday interview, Stone reportedly said U.S. public opinion was focused on the Holocaust as a result of the "Jewish domination of the media," adding that an upcoming film of him aims to put Adolf Hitler and Soviet dictator Joseph Stalin "in context."
"There's a major lobby in the United States," Stone said, adding that "they are hard workers. They stay on top of every comment, the most powerful lobby in Washington."
The famed Hollywood director of such films as "Platoon" and "JFK," also said that while "Hitler was a Frankenstein," there was also a "Dr Frankenstein."
"German industrialists, the Americans and the British. He had a lot of support," Stone told the Sunday Times, adding that "Hitler did far more damage to the Russians than the Jewish people, 25 or 30 [million killed]."
Referring to the alleged influence of the powerful Jewish lobby on U.S. foreign policy, Stone said that Israel had distorted "United States foreign policy for years," adding he felt U.S. policy toward Iran was "horrible."
"Iran isn't necessarily the good guy," Stone said, insisting that Americans did not "know the full story."
"Iran isn't necessarily the good guy," Stone said, insisting that Americans did not "know the full story."
Stone's comments to the Sunday times echo previous remarks by the Hollywood director, regarding what he perceives as the distorted view of figures such as Adolf Hitler and Josef Stalin in U.S. media.
Earlier this year, Stone, speaking at the at the Television Critics Association's semi-annual press tour in Pasadena said that "Hitler is an easy scapegoat throughout history and it's been used cheaply."
"He's the product of a series of actions. It's cause and effect ... People in America don't know the connection between World War I and World War II," Stone said, adding that through his documentary work he has been able to "walk in Stalin's shoes and Hitler's shoes to understand their point of view."
"We're going to educate our minds and liberalize them and broaden them. We want to move beyond opinions ... Go into the funding of the Nazi party. How many American corporations were involved, from GM through IBM. Hitler is just a man who could have easily been assassinated," Stone said
2a)ANTI-SEMITE FARRAKHAN
COMING BACK TO ALABAMA
Nation of Islam leader Louis Farrakhan, one of America's most notorious anti-Semites, is coming back to Alabama after speaking last year at Alabama A&M University in Huntsville. Farrakhan will be visiting and speaking at Tuskegee University, which like A&M is a historically black university. He will be at Tuskegee March 20-22.
Farrakhan has been invited by the Tuskegee University Muslim Student Association and the Black Belt Deliberative Dialogue. Farrakhan, seen as an inspirational figure by some in the black community because of his message of independence and self-reliance, has woven vicious anti-Semitic beliefs and statements into his rhetoric and writing for decades. It is unfortunate that he is returning to our state.
Meanwhile, the reaction already is being felt. The following are edited excerpts from a report by AlabamaNews.net:
The national leader of the Nation of Islam, Louis Farrakhan, is speaking at Tuskegee University next week. But his visit is stirring up controversy. In a Alabama News Network exclusive, a Tuskegee University board member speaks out about his concerns.
"There is no question that he hates Jewish people, and I find that appalling," says Andy Hornsby, who sits on the Tuskegee University Board of Trustees. "We shouldn't endorse him anymore than we endorse the Ku Klux Klan. They are two organizations of a similar breed," says Hornsby. "It's time to put all this hate behind us," he says.
"He has a right to be there, and I have a right not to go, and I encourage my friends and others not to attend," says Hornsby, who believes in free speech.
Vice President of Student Affairs Cynthia Sellers says the university invites people from all walks of life to speak at the school. "We know that his main topic is on Historical Black Colleges and Universities, and of course, by being one, we are very excited," she says.
Hornsby says Board Chairman Charles Williams shares his concerns. Hornsby says the Board of Trustees will be meeting this weekend to discuss how they should handle the matter.
2b)Intellectuals and Race: Part III
The desire of intellectuals for some grand theory that will explain complex patterns with some solitary and simple factor has produced many ideas that do not stand up under scrutiny, but which have nevertheless had widespread acceptance -- and sometimes catastrophic consequences -- in countries around the world.
The theory of genetic determinism which dominated the early 20th century led to many harmful consequences, ranging from racial segregation and discrimination up to and including the Holocaust. The currently prevailing theory is that malice of one sort or another explains group differences in outcomes. Whether the lethal results of this theory would add up to as many murders as in the Holocaust is a question whose answer would require a detailed study of the history of lethal outbursts against groups hated for their success.
These would include murderous mob violence against the Jews in Europe, the Chinese in Southeast Asia, the Armenians in the Ottoman Empire, and the Ibos in Nigeria, among others. Class-based mass slaughters of the successful would range from Stalin's extermination of the kulaks in the Soviet Union to Pol Pot's wiping out of at least a quarter of the population of Cambodia for the crime of being educated middle class people, as evidenced by even such tenuous signs as wearing glasses.
Minorities who have been more successful than the general population have been the least likely to have gotten ahead by discriminating against politically dominant majorities. Yet it is precisely such minorities who have attracted the most mass violence over the centuries and in countries around the world.
All the blacks lynched in the entire history of the United States would not add up to as many murders as those committed in one year by mobs against the Jews in Europe, the Armenians in the Ottoman Empire or the Chinese in Southeast Asia.
What is there about group success that inflames mobs in such disparate times and places, not to mention mass-murdering governments in Nazi Germany or the Pol Pot regime in Cambodia? We can speculate about the reasons but there is no escaping the reality.
Groups that lag behind have often blamed their lags on wrong-doing by groups that are more successful. Since sainthood is not common in any branch of the human race, there is seldom a lack of sins to cite, including haughtiness by those who happen to be on top for the moment. But the real question is whether these sins -- real or imagined -- are actually the reason for different levels of achievement.
Intellectuals, whom we might expect to counter mass hysteria with rational analysis, have all too often been in the vanguard of those promoting envy and resentment of the successful.
This has been especially true of people with degrees but without any economically meaningful skills that would create the kinds of rewards they expected or felt entitled to.
Such people have been prominent as both leaders and followers of groups promoting anti-Semitic policies in Europe between the two World Wars, tribalism in Africa and changing Sri Lanka from a country once renowned for its intergroup harmony to a nation that descended into ethnic violence and then a decades-long civil war with unspeakable atrocities.
Such intellectuals have inflamed group against group, promoting discrimination and/or physical violence in such disparate countries as India, Hungary, Nigeria, Czechoslovakia and Canada.
Both the intellectuals' theory of genetic determinism as the reason for group differences in outcomes and their opposite theory of discrimination as the reason have created racial and ethnic polarization. So has the idea that it must be one or the other.
The false dichotomy that it must be one or the other leaves more successful groups with a choice between arrogance and guilt. It leaves less successful groups with the choice of believing that they are inherently inferior for all time or else that they are victims of the unconscionable malice of others.
When innumerable factors make equal outcomes virtually impossible, reducing those factors to genes or malice is a formula for needless and dangerous polarization, whose consequences have often been written in blood across the pages of history.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
No comments:
Post a Comment