It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Thank you.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
But the biggest shock came out of a federal courtroom at the end of March – though if you follow these matters closely, it may not have been so shocking at all – when a landmark class-action civil lawsuit against the banks for Libor-related offenses was dismissed. In that case, a federal judge accepted the banker-defendants' incredible argument: If cities and towns and other investors lost money because of Libor manipulation, that was their own fault for ever thinking the banks were competing in the first place.
"A farce," was one antitrust lawyer's response to the eyebrow-raising dismissal.
"Incredible," says Sylvia Sokol, an attorney for Constantine Cannon, a firm that specializes in antitrust cases.
All of these stories collectively pointed to the same thing: These banks, which already possess enormous power just by virtue of their financial holdings – in the United States, the top six banks, many of them the same names you see on the Libor and ISDAfix panels, own assets equivalent to 60 percent of the nation's GDP – are beginning to realize the awesome possibilities for increased profit and political might that would come with colluding instead of competing. Moreover, it's increasingly clear that both the criminal justice system and the civil courts may be impotent to stop them, even when they do get caught working together to game the system.
Read more: www.rollingstone.com...
Follow us: @rollingstone on Twitter | RollingStone on Facebook
Originally posted by Swills
reply to post by Abstruse
Nah, they'll just put us all in work camps if we stopped working, besides we need to make money to surive. Maybe a good start would to stop doin bizness with the Big Banks. Not the solution but a pretty good start.edit on 26-4-2013 by Swills because: (no reason given)
Originally posted by tridentblue
Right now, we're told that the mother of Boston bombers is getting her information from conspiracy sites, and perhaps the bombers did too. There is a temptation Americans have to give in to that binary switch in the brain: conspiracy theorists good? Conspiracy theorists bad? The dangers of such simplification are high: If we accept conspiracy theorists as unconditionally good, we are married to the kind of bull#ters who claim the Newtown shootings never happened. If we announce them all as bad, we have implicitly announced our willingness to turn a blind eye to an entire category of criminal behaviour, some of which is very well documented, and may - as this article suggests - be shaping things as central as the entire financial scene.
This is a time which requires critical, multi-dimensional thinkers. Not on off/good evil/right left binary brains.
PEace!
Originally posted by Swills
reply to post by Abstruse
Nah, they'll just put us all in work camps if we stopped working, besides we need to make money to surive. Maybe a good start would to stop doin bizness with the Big Banks. Not the solution but a pretty good start.edit on 26-4-2013 by Swills because: (no reason given)
Originally posted by dc4lifeskater
and its been going on since the invention of banks.. so whats new.. it will never change.
A large number of people creating and using their own economic instruments would essentially bypass the current system altogether