Speculation: Conspiracy or Corincidence?

In recent months, I've been having some very interesting discussions with ATS members about the hidden politics of economic dedline, and the politics of economic depression. The terrible truth is that our present circumstances can be traced back to a long slow downward trend that will someday end in nothing less than collapse.

It's been pointed out by many smart ATS members that commodity prices are so high because speculators are willing to pay unrealistically prices for them. the U.S. dollar os doing so badly because trade policy is weak, which encourages speculators to bet AGAINST the dollar.

You don't have to be a conspiracy theorist to know that it's only a matter of time until financial speculation and commodity speculation result in a crash. America's failing credit and home mortgage crisis make this case in very stark terms. Once the credit is gone, the bottom will fall out of the speculator's market because they won't have any more money to make their bets.

This high-level gambling is going to have negative consequences for people much further down the economic food chain. Retirement funds will be wiped out. Investments made by honest people who managed to save a few bucks will dry up, leaving them with nothing to show for their willingness to live within their means. People who never thought they'd be homeless will be on the streets, thanks to a few greedy people whom they will never meet, or know the names of.

After some thought, I decided to open this thread on speculation so that this rather seedy aspect of the problem could be talked about openly and all the attention that it deserves.

The American economy is broken. It has been broken for some time. Liberals and Conservatives alike have been responsible for its decline.

Oil keeps hitting record highs because some relatively insignificant news causes speculators to jump and prices shoot up. Good old fashioned supply and demand is a major part of it too. Larger populations are using greater shares of the same worldwide pool of resources.

The dollar can't go down much more before the rest of the world gives up on it. The money people are getting while the getting is good, then they can retire to someplace sunny while the rest of us struggle to survive.

reply to post by Justin Oldham

I've been having some very interesting discussions with ATS members about the hidden politics of economic decline, and the politics of economic depression. (1) You don't have to be a conspiracy theorist to know that it's only a matter of time until financial speculation and commodity speculation result in a crash. (2) Retirement funds will be wiped out. Investments made by honest people who managed to save a few bucks will dry up, leaving them with nothing to show for their willingness to live within their means. (3) The American economy is broken. It has been broken for some time. Liberals and Conservatives alike have been responsible for its decline.

1) How many people would be involved in a conspiracy to first loot and then bankrupt the world? Look at what Michael Milken and his brother did in the late 1970s through the mid-1980s when his high yield bonds a/k/a junk bonds industry collapsed. Aside: junk bonds offered future earnings as collateral rather than the standard real property and improvements. Success depended in large part on the good reputation of the bond firm handling the new offerings. Drexel Harriman Ripley which merged with another old line company Burnham and Company. Adage: If you don’t know your product, know your merchant. All too many people bought junk bonds on the reputation of the bond firms that offered the bonds. The same thing on the current mortgage meltdown, by the bye. End.

It’s my opinion a couple dozen people in the US, a like number spread between London, Tokyo and Hong Kong and you are in business like no one ever dreamed! 50 to 100 conspirators. Only NSA can tell us if this really happened and is happening still. But will they? We’re talking trillions of dollars here.

2) Billions of $ are out there for the grabbing! Have you noticed lately that the TWO most frequent ads shown on TV are 1) pharmaceuticals and 2) Financial Management Firms. Up front that should tell us something! That’s where the money to be made IS! Excuse the part Yiddish. There is very little to none of regulating people who are out there offering tell you how to invest your money. And for that advice, those people get big commissions. Stock firms are paid on buy-sell commissions. Mutual funds have more charges than you can imagine. Banks are allowed to operate with conflict of interest laws held in abeyance. Everybody out there is waiting to take your money! I mean, doesn’t every investor want the same thing? Safety with good return? Maximum profit with minimum risk. It is fascinating how people smart enough to make a lot of money will let someone who is glib talk them into anything.

3) For years I have argued that to create wealth you must MAKE something! Shuffling papers is not creating wealth. We were once the greatest MAKER of things in the world. We became the richest country in the world. We won the Battle of the Atlantic (WW2) because the US could make ships faster than the Germans could make torpedoes. OK, I exaggerated a little. Now we don’t make much. BUT we accumulated so much wealth that even though we are losing it by the trillions of dollars every year, we started with so much it is hard to notice.

Like polar bears, we are living on our accumulated FAT! Also like polar bears, the times have changed. We may not be able to accumulate more FAT - wealth - in the time remaining. Then we like the polar bear will perish! The great decline in wealth is further hidden from us because most of our dealings are inside the country with each other. When we go abroad or buy something MADE abroad, we have to pay MORE for today it because our money is WORTH less. We are going broke and don’t know it!

Who creates more wealth, a MBA or an artist making pottery? Yes paper facilitates commerce, but moving paper is not creating wealth unless you are a paper maker.

[edit on 4/21/2008 by donwhite]

I completely agree with the premise of the OP - speculation is no better than gambling and, worse, it's often gambling with the world's limited resources such as food, oil and - coming soon - water.

I made the point in a recent thread and was accused of being a Marxist for even suggesting that some aspects of Capitalism could use some tweaking.

...more and more I am thinking conspiracy. Everything is just falling into place exactly as predicted. I mean how many coincidences can there possibly be?



[edit on 21/4/08 by kosmicjack]

Originally posted by kosmicjack
...more and more I am thinking conspiracy. Everything is just falling into place exactly as predicted. I mean how many coincidences can there possibly be?

Agreed. The rich get richer and the poor get poorer, until a hero comes along to save the day. I've watched my parents fall into a pit of debt, and just as they are starting to get out, the economy starts to fail dramatically, and it seems as if there is no hope. What, if anything, can we do to make it better?

I made my own predictions here on ATS, just two years ago. For the most part, I think we have to accep SOME of this mess is real stupdity in action. Gross mis-management. The rest falls under the category of conspiracy because our political and social elites are not trying to stop this...but...they are trying very hard to take advantage of it.

Bear in mind that I am no economic expert. Forgive me if I go off topic while giving my thoughts .


The demand for oil has gone thou the roof in my short life time due to the economic rise of India and China . Speculation oil seems to be low risk due to the fact that the general trend of oil prices will remain on the up . Assuming that oil was over priced then the price of oil would be headed for a fall much like the housing market . Then investors would encounter the same problems banks have that is the drop in the housing market means that banks cant recuperate there losses from mortgage sales .

A lot of smaller lenders operate on an unsound model . Such outfit target low income earners and beneficiaries . In effect they target the people who are most unlikely to be able to repay loans . Credit cards are also available to people on the same level incomes . Some people live above there means or almost live on credit in terms of credit cards and hire purchasers . These same people wonder why they have so little money to pay there utility bills.

Long term smaller firms cant operate on such a unsound basis they are bound to go under along taking any money that people had invested with it .The large banks who credit cards aside don't target low income people as there main market will be able to handle the stormy waters much better . The larger banks will have to raise the income thrash hold concerning who they give home loans to due to the overall increase in housing prices .

Throw in the unhealthy corporate culture that exists and all of this is a long about way of saying that even without over priced commodity's the fundamentals are wrong in some places which can only lead to trouble.

reply to post by xpert11

I am no economic expert. The demand for oil has gone thou the roof in my short life time. Speculation oil seems to be low risk due to the fact that the general trend of oil prices will remain on the up. Assuming that oil was over priced then the price of oil would be headed for a fall much like the housing market. The larger banks will have to raise the income thrash hold concerning who they give home loans to due to the overall increase in housing prices. Throw in the unhealthy corporate culture that exists and all of this is a long about way of saying that even without over priced commodity's the fundamentals are wrong in some places which can only lead to trouble.

Yes on speculation in oil is not so speculative after all. Last year we learned that crude oil production is 85 mbd - million barrels per day - and that consumption was 84 mbd. First, I don’t know who is in charge here, but I’d never allow consumption to get so close to production. It takes a lot MORE time to increase production that it does to increase consumption. That cannot be a good move nor a nice place to find yourself in. The PIC - Person in Charge - needs to be replaced!

Price of oil? Yesterday it set another record, $117 per barrel. OTOH, if the dollar has fallen in value - it has - then the ADJUSTED price of oil may be a lot less. Happiness is just a calculation away! You could say, “Adjusted for inflation, the price of oil is $80 in 1990 dollars.” Or just pick any year to get the price you want. Such crapola transports both you and your audience out of harsh reality and back into the comfort zone of nah-nah land.

Will the crude oil bubble burst? We witnessed the highest price ever - up to then - in the 1973 OPEC inspired retaliatory oil embargo. The first joint action taken by the newly created mainly Arab OPEC following the Yom Kippur War. Geez? Is everything about oil connected to the Israeli and the Palestinian (Arab) dispute? Maybe if we did the right thing in Israel the price of oil would fall? Is this just one more COST we must bear for blindly backing Israel in its illegal and immoral ethnic cleansing of the old British Palestine Mandate? Hmm? OPEC - Oil Producing and Exporting Countries.

Unhealthy corporate culture in America? Shucks, you mean something like ExxonMobil - netted $45 b. last year - which refuses to pay the $6 b. judgment in the Exxon Valdez tanker oil spill in Prince Williams Sound, AK on March 24, 1989? Heck, most of those guys who lost it all will be dead before ExxonMobil has to pay up! Maybe this suit will just die on its own if we ignore it long enough? Responsible corporate management. PS. EM did the Christian thing to avoid adverse publicity, and changed the Exxon Valdez name to a new Exxon Mediterranean still plowing the ocean waves!

On corporate ethics and morals or lack thereof Mr X11, you sound refreshingly like the old British Labour Party warhorse, Ernest Bevin (1881-1951) who was one outspoken defender of the nationalization of heavy industry in 1946. Maybe we can learn from the past? Cheers!

[edit on 4/22/2008 by donwhite]

Speculators around the world are playing a dangerous game of betting on the rising price of commodities. It's gotten hout of hand when the average consumer faces a daily price change (upward). Does there come a point when speculations becomes piracy?

reply to post by Justin Oldham

Speculators around the world are playing a dangerous game of betting on the rising price of commodities. It's gotten out of hand when the average consumer faces a daily price change (upward). Does there come a point when speculations becomes piracy?

The MSM - Main Stream Media - could identify those speculators who are adding NOTHING but cost to what are mostly basic necessities for the majority of us. I see where Rupert Murdoch just fired the WSJ managing editor which he implied 6 weeks ago he would not do. I have always HATED Rupert Murdoch and now I’m about to be joined by many others. A day late and a dollar short. I may be stupid about most things, but one thing I do know: What is in my own self-interest.

Suppose I’m correct, that between 50 and 100 so-called speculators are driving up commodity prices. By speculator I mean a person or other financial entity buys a commodity that it cannot use. Like CitiBank buying a supertanker load of crude oil? 133,000,000 gallons of crude oil. Or finished product. The US imports about 20% of its 22 mbd in refined products. Million barrels per day. See Note 1.

It is illegitimate for CitiBank or any out of industry entity to be allowed to MESS with the system that has worked more or less well for 300 years since first employed in Holland.


Note 1. As of 2008, the worlds four largest working supertankers are sister ships owned by Overseas Shipholding Group and Euronav NV. Each of the 4 ships has a capacity of 500 million liters of crude oil. That’s 3.16 million barrels (42 US gallons each). 133 million gallons US. Wikipedia says ocean freight adds but 2 cents per gallon to the pump price. en.wikipedia.org...

[edit on 4/22/2008 by donwhite]

Don my views on the unhealthy corporate culture can be found here . Onto other matters it would be naive to think that Speculators and supplies aren't in cahoots on some level . Oil has shown that if you have a monopoly the most profitable thing to do is to supply some what less then the market demands . The thing is happening or will happen with food and water .

Suffice to say such practices show up a flaw in market based economics. Don before you get started one must recognize the flaws in the system they support in order for improvements to be made.




[edit on 23-4-2008 by xpert11]

Donwhite asserts: It is illegitimate for CitiBank or any out of industry entity to be allowed to MESS with the system [commodity futures markets] that has worked more or less well for 300 years since first employed in Holland.

To which Xpert11 replied: “ . . it would be naive to think that Speculators and supplies aren't in cahoots on some level. Oil has shown that if you have a monopoly the most profitable thing to do is to supply some what less then the market demands. The thing is happening or will happen with food and water. Suffice to say such practices show up a flaw in market based economics. Don before you get started one must recognize the flaws in the system they support in order for improvements to be made.

I don’t see us being in any conflict. We are talking about the same thing from 2 perspectives. I’m typically American. I want to quickly analyze the problem, concoct a solution, put it into effect and then move on to the next problem!

You said “ . . show up [as] a flaw in market based economics.” I assume you meant by that to challenge the classic Adam Smith economics that the law of supply and demand controls. It was our own John D Rockefeller who gave the example of the advantage of monopoly control of an essential product. Standard Oil. 1879 to 1911. en.wikipedia.org...

The problem with Adam Smith is that we never had a FREE MARKET economy. Anywhere. Anytime. Rome built Hadrian’s Wall and merchants to the south were protected from roving bands of brigands. The value of a very large expense item of the time was bestowed on them by chance of location. They worked south of the Wall.

To the extent anyone enjoys an artificial advantage, the market outcome is skewed and is not FREE. Look at our own John Adams. FF and 2nd president. A strong central government advocate. He became wealthy as a smuggler. He could not have been a smuggler had not King George III laid a tax on molasses and rum. Yet, King George III could not support a large army and navy on a “wing and a prayer” to lift part of a song to exemplify my thinking. Al Capone repeated this process when the US enacted Prohibition in the 1920s.

As I wrote in another thread, oil formerly enjoyed a 24.5% DEPLETION allowance. There was no need for that. The oil people could have raised their prices. It was - and is - a free country. But, by making a level playing field, the government guaranteed a handsome profit to oil players and the public got fairly uniform prices for the product. It’s arguable which benefits the most from governmental intervention, but hey, that’s life.

I have digressed too far already. I quit here.

[edit on 4/23/2008 by donwhite]

So, what comes next after oil breaks $120 per barrel? You just know that as gasoline breaks $4 per gallon, that food costs will be outta sight. I have already decided ot go shopping tomorrow, instead of Saturday.

Don I will rephrase . The fact that you would put the speculators and people with other interests into the same group just enforces the view that a few people can manipulate the stock market to there advantage . Speculators and and the likes CEOs can manipulate stock prices to go higher or lower as per suits there needs . We have discussed the other matters you have raised and you know what my views are.

Note I am not saying that everybody who owns shares or is a trader is an unethical law breaker . But just like in any other aspects of life you can find unsavoury characters .

I just want to say what an amazing thread this is. Great points all around and a civil discussion. I think the topic will be discussed at large by the MSM and just about everyone else in the coming months and year. This is just the beginning.

Does Capitalism need tweaking? Maybe just a little. I know it's controversial, but it warrants an intellectually honest discussion. I am sure however that the over-zealous free marketers will be chomping at the bit to label any one who questions the system as a socialist or a marxist.

We'll see.

Originally posted by kosmicjack
I just want to say what an amazing thread this is.

Great points all around and a civil discussion. I think the topic will be discussed at large by the MSM and just about everyone else in the coming months and year. This is just the beginning.

Several ATS members have been after me for the better part of a year to have this discussion. If you go back and read some of the early replies to my first posts on ATS, you'll see that a lot of honest people were openly sceptical. I realized, back then, that I had to wait for current events to catch up to my predictions be-fore we could have this conversation.

Now, we face of the facts in real time. The dollar is in trouble. The American housing market, on which the Bush economy was based, has now "tanked." Bad debt at all levels now threatens the worldwide flow of money. It's only a matter of time before the actual crash takes place.

As yo ucan see from what's already in this thread, its not hard for liberals and conservatives to put their finger on the problem...and...some of its solutions. In general terms, we realize that we make it worse as long as we keep trying to stall or prevent that crash.

The averal person now has much more incentive than they ever did (i n the last 40 years) to clean up their debts and begin the process of stockpiling shelf-stable goods for future use. We're already seeing items in the news in which people around the world are hoarding rice.

The crash of 1929 took most people by surprise. In today's world, we've known this was coming for at least four (4) years. I'm not the only one who has made this point on ATS for the last two (2) years. becuse we can see this coming, we as individuals CAN take some small steps to prepare ourselves and our households for what comes next.

reply to post by Justin Oldham

We're already seeing items in the news in which people around the world are hoarding rice. The crash of 1929 took most people by surprise. In today's world, we've known this was coming for at least four (4) years. I'm not the only one who has made this point on ATS for the last two (2) years.

I have to be brief. I hope we have learned TWO lessons from this not yet over economic disaster. 1) The Reagan Revolution is the root cause of this disaster. 2) There is an inescapable inseparable role for GOOD government; and the size of good government is related to the number of people it serves, not to any theory of little good or big bad.

More later. Added 4/26/08

We as a people have learned the hard way how woefully undermanned the Consumer Product Safety Commission is. Unless you want lead paint in your children’s toys, e-coli in your food and tainted hamburger.

Just this past Thursday the acting Director of the Food and Drug Administration admitted in testimony before Congress that the agency is understaffed to the extent it cannot perform the duties assigned to it by Law. We have learned how understaffed the Central Intelligence Agency was and probably still is. Fewer than 20 people fluent in Arabic when the president launched his own personal War on Iraq in March, 2003. 4,030 KIA so far. Blood on his hands!

We have heard the dastardly tale how the FBI fired one Arabic translator who found significant errors in a prior translation became she was not a TEAM player. Somebody in the FBI values the agency’s reputation MORE than they want a good product!

Yesterday it was newsworthy that CBS has obtained e-maiils from a PRIVATE MEDIA CONSULTANT hired by the Veteran Administration presumably paid for with taxpayers money, to COVER UP the number of suicides among veterans in general and among Iraq veterans in particular. What in the Name of Jesus does the VA need with PRIVATE MEDIA CONSULTANTS? Has it ever occurred to anyone in the Republican Administration to just tell the truth?

It makes me so mad to hear VP Cheney, the Oberfuhrer Herr Rumfeld and Bush43 LIE every day by claiming they LOVE our veterans. Abraham Lincoln visited the wounded veterans in W-DC every day! Bush43 NEVER did until the Washington Post made its report. The current leadership gave us Walter Reed Hospital for veterans with mold and rats! That for our SICK and WOUNDED veterans. We know how and we know what but we can’t seem to get it done. They do not love anything but Halliburton and $4 gasoline!

The things I've mentioned above do not happen in a vacuum. Somebody knew about each one. Somebody approved of each one. Has the Wonder Boy from Texas fired anyone? He said it himself "I is the Decider!" Is this what he DECIDED to do the our government? To pull a FEMA on the whole dam thing so that the ordinary Joe will think the only solution is PRIVATIZING the United States Government. Abolish the Army, contract with Blackwater?

American’s better wake up! I don’t want to loosely bandy about the word FASCIST but it’s got to be related in some way to what is happening here. Under the Bush43 conspiracy.

[edit on 4/26/2008 by donwhite]

It's possible for liberals and conservatives alike to lead us well. Unfortunately, they don't always do so. American government is, in many respects, an excersize in compromise. Elected officials and civil servants are called on every day to make those compromises.

As a historian, I would suggst that our national decline is tied to our decline as a society, which is manifested in the decline in the quality of our leadership. I very much regret the fact that the "slide" we've w9tnessed over the last seven and a half years has taken place on a Republican's watch,...but...the poor judgement we've seen could have just as easily been brought to us by a sitting Democrat with a Dem-friendly Congress.

Now, our economy is failing. The worst-case scenario is that this is our last failure. The depression ends up being so bad that the country never recovers. Some time later this century, we could have a civil war that tear the national fabirc, once and for all. That's teh worst case.

As Don says, we have a chance to learn from our mistakes. In recent decades, our government has failed to enforce many of the laws it has on the books. Many Federal agencies have failed to carry out their mandates. Civil service has not been the example that it should have been. All of this has come about because "we the people" stopped demanding those things. We got conned in to thinking that we didn't have to demand ANYTHING except a free ride.

the conspiracy tied to this "event" is one of knowing exploitation. The reforms we need to lessen the pain of this recession/depression will require men and women of principle to carry them out. The efforts needed to lead and carry out the recovery will also require men and women who are selfless and patriotic.

I've said on many occasions that politics and patriotism are two sides of the same coin. We get what we pay for, when we spend that coin . We have not wisely invested our "civic currency." Presidnet Bush calls it "political capitol." You get the idea.

The Constitution makes it clear that government should play a role in simple regulation. It's not there to run the eocnomy, but it is there to make sure that we trade honestly and avoid poisoning ourselves. It says a lot when one Preisdne3t after another makes poor political appointments that do not serve the national interest.

We're always going to debate just exactly WHAT the national interest is, but we'll always agree that good government is ben-ev-o-lent. Our politicians fail that test when they insist in 'giving' us more government that's "for our own good."

In the years to come, Federal agencies will come to dominate the U.S. economy. It'll ecome "managed" in much the same way that the Europeans handle theirs. I'm not thrilled about that, but its what I see coming. Civil service will expand, and we'll no doubt be getting a few new agencies. It'll be a far cry from what I was brought up to believe in, so I'll be speaking out against it when I see injustice.

Do we fight this trend? Yes. Why? Because somebody needs to know that we did. Some day, when future generations look back, they need to find voices of dissent tucked away in some dusty old library...or a forgotten service still tied to the internet.

reply to post by Justin Oldham

It's possible for liberals and conservatives alike to lead us well. Unfortunately, they don't always do so. American government is, in many respects, an exercise in compromise. Elected officials and civil servants are called on every day to make those compromises.

I agree on both sides doing well at times. I for example, have no quarrel with RMN - Nixon - but for his criminal tendencies. May I digress on that a minute?

Assuming Nixon was an astute politician with many highly competent political advisers around him, WHY did he do what he did in 1972? I’m referring of course to the repeated break-ins of Larry O’Brien’s office to bug his telephone.

I’ll hold back my own ideas for any responses.

Resume. Compromises? Yes, and I’d add that only in autocratic governments do you lack compromise. And like it or not, I argue the much bad-mouthed EARMARKS are the very essence of compromise! I think a few outrageous abuses have been exaggerated so much that the whole earmark process has suffered greatly.

I agree that in earmarks especially we need 1) absolute transparency and 2) assurance of a level playing field in performing whatever task it is the earmarked money is intended to accomplish. Openness. Which is more transparency. Nepotism and favoritism need to be ended. To the 3rd degree of consanguinity.

I would suggest that our national decline is tied to our decline as a society, which is manifested in the decline in the quality of our leadership. I very much regret the fact that the "slide" we've witnessed over the last seven and a half years has taken place on a Republican's watch ... but ... the poor judgment we've seen could have just as easily been brought to us by a sitting Democrat with a Dem-friendly Congress. Now, our economy is failing. The worst-case scenario is that this is our last failure. The depression ends up being so bad that the country never recovers . . As Don says, we have a chance to learn from our mistakes. In recent decades, our government has failed to enforce many of the laws it has on the books.

Up to a point I can and do agree with J/O. However to make more complete our understanding, I must add that I attribute the willful and calculated massive reduction in staff of the Federal bureaucracy as also a significant contributor to the general decline of society. The unannounced and not debated change of mission of the Federal government since 1980 from being a place for GOOD and DEPENDABLE last recourse - resource - into a Potemkin village - a hollow facade only - has contributed mightily to the general decline in the society’s common public perception. As we always said, there were 2 things you could count on. GOD and Taxes. GOD seems to be on a long vacation or hard of hearing and now our taxes have failed us. It’s no wonder society is declining. We are alone in the Universe!

Rehash. Once upon a time the Corps of Engineers spoke with unchallenged authority. After the ‘05 Katrina we learned the apolitical Corps had also been decimated in staff and silenced in speaking out publicly. ONLY the Corps KNEW of the intentional deficiencies built into the levees. The Corps could not speak out. The Corps should have been speaking.

Beginning in 1980, the whole apparatus of the immense Federal bureaucracy was turned 180 degrees into a non-performing shadow of its former self. Once the US Civil Service was internationally acclaimed and the 3rd world marveled and wished to emulate it at home. After 1980 - a brief interlude under Clinton - only persons philosophically antithetical to the agencies original mission were appointed to HEAD those very agencies!

Continuing my rant. Recall the NJ meat processor which recalled 20 million pounds of ground beef produced over a 2 year period? A very old company, but the recall forced it into bankruptcy. Maybe NOT coincidentally that not only denied injured parties financial relief for any harm BUT it aborted airing in public the constant FAILURE of the FDA in its inspection "program" which is laughable. TS they say, that’s life!

Recall the CA meat packer last year that recalled 150 million ponds of processed beef handled over a 3 years period? 25% of that beef went to public school lunch programs. With children trading colds and flu, it’s hard for parents to know why their child is sick. And this company also did the Christian thing, it went into bankruptcy. Once again this predictable move - not challenged by the Federal government - denied a public airing of the harm done. BUT of more consequence, the aborted legal proceedings did not get the opportunity to show publicly for all to see how the FDA's repeated FAILED food inspection program remains no more than A LAUGHABLE farce. Come Quick Sweet Jesus!

RIP. In neither case was the FDA - Food and Drug Administration - in front of or on top of these problems. They played catchup only. Q. How long before we will adequately staff PUBLIC PROTECTION AGENCIES to perform the missions assigned?

[edit on 5/3/2008 by donwhite]

I'm rushing through here today. Sorry. On the Nixon point, it seems clear (now) that Tricky Dick's underlings made some very broad assumptions about the "yield" of of intell from the Watergate break-in.

The number one reason why the did it, according to G. Gordon Liddy, was to plant listening devices so they could spy on the DNC over the long term.

I am enclined to agree with Liddy's admission. Electronics tech in the early 1970's was just good enough to allow for the kind of surveillance that we take for granted today. Even now, both parties do spy on each other, using the most elaborate means.

I refer you to the 1974 film, "The Conversation," starring a young Gene Hackman (with hair).