Spitzer, Silverstein, Kroll and 9/11

[Alulim]

Click the images for the connections.

[karlos]

Israeli at center of Spitzer scandal

The alleged procurer in the prostitution scandal surrounding New York Gov. Eliot Spitzer has an Israeli passport. A federal magistrate in New York ordered Mark "Michael" Brener held without bail after his arrest March 6 related to allegations that he headed the Emperors VIP Club, described by police as a high-priced prostitution ring. The Associated Press reported that $600,000 in cash and an Israeli passport were elements in denying bail to Brener. Spitzer, whose office conducted serious investigations of at least two Jewish organizations when he was state attorney general, made a brief statement to the media Monday admitting he had let down his family and the public.

Looks like the Escort agency is run by Mossad.
Top US officials such as Spitzer have obviously been blackmailed.
Dont forget Spitzer has attacked Israeli/Russian money laundering and his outing may have more to do with getting a number of crooks off the hook than anything Spitzer has done wrong.
Dick Cheney a former client may have also had his strings pulled.
George Bush who ofcourse used a male escort Jim Guckert.

Clearly Mossad via this sex ring has control of the US government.

[rodin]

Good info Karlos

Got linx?

[karlos]

http://www.jta.org/cgi-bin/iowa/breaking/107452.html

[rodin]

[rodin]

[Alulim]

[Alulim]

http://www.politicalfriendster.com/showConnection.php?id1=6043&id2=242 7

"Additionally, Wayne Madsen reports [subscription required] that “Defense sources have confirmed our March 11, 2008, report that Emperors Club VIP, the prostitution firm that entangled New York’s outgoing Governor Eliot Spitzer in a call girl ring, is viewed by US intelligence as a front for Israel’s intelligence agency, the Mossad."

[kbo234]

Did this article written by Spitzer cook his goose?


Predatory Lenders' Partner in Crime

Former New York Governor Eliot Spitzer – Washington Post February 14, 2008


"When history tells the story of the subprime lending crisis and recounts its devastating effects on the lives of so many innocent homeowners, the Bush administration will not be judged favorably. The tale is still unfolding, but when the dust settles, it will be judged as a willing accomplice to the lenders who went to any lengths in their quest for profits. So willing, in fact, that it used the power of the federal government in an unprecedented assault on state legislatures, as well as on state attorneys general and anyone else on the side of consumers."

(Eliot Spitzer, former Governor of the State of New York)

Several years ago, state attorneys general and others involved in consumer protection began to notice a marked increase in a range of predatory lending practices by mortgage lenders. Some were misrepresenting the terms of loans, making loans without regard to consumers' ability to repay, making loans with deceptive "teaser" rates that later ballooned astronomically, packing loans with undisclosed charges and fees, or even paying illegal kickbacks. These and other practices, we noticed, were having a devastating effect on home buyers. In addition, the widespread nature of these practices, if left unchecked, threatened our financial markets.

Even though predatory lending was becoming a national problem, the Bush administration looked the other way and did nothing to protect American homeowners. In fact, the government chose instead to align itself with the banks that were victimizing consumers.

Predatory lending was widely understood to present a looming national crisis. This threat was so clear that as New York attorney general, I joined with colleagues in the other 49 states in attempting to fill the void left by the federal government. Individually, and together, state attorneys general of both parties brought litigation or entered into settlements with many subprime lenders that were engaged in predatory lending practices. Several state legislatures, including New York's, enacted laws aimed at curbing such practices.

What did the Bush administration do in response? Did it reverse course and decide to take action to halt this burgeoning scourge? As Americans are now painfully aware, with hundreds of thousands of homeowners facing foreclosure and our markets reeling, the answer is a resounding no.
Not only did the Bush administration do nothing to protect consumers, it embarked on an aggressive and unprecedented campaign to prevent states from protecting their residents from the very problems to which the federal government was turning a blind eye.

Let me explain: The administration accomplished this feat through an obscure federal agency called the Office of the Comptroller of the Currency (OCC). The OCC has been in existence since the Civil War. Its mission is to ensure the fiscal soundness of national banks. For 140 years, the OCC examined the books of national banks to make sure they were balanced, an important but uncontroversial function. But a few years ago, for the first time in its history, the OCC was used as a tool against consumers.

In 2003, during the height of the predatory lending crisis, the OCC invoked a clause from the 1863 National Bank Act to issue formal opinions preempting all state predatory lending laws, thereby rendering them inoperative. The OCC also promulgated new rules that prevented states from enforcing any of their own consumer protection laws against national banks. The federal government's actions were so egregious and so unprecedented that all 50 state attorneys general, and all 50 state banking superintendents, actively fought the new rules.

But the unanimous opposition of the 50 states did not deter, or even slow, the Bush administration in its goal of protecting the banks. In fact, when my office opened an investigation of possible discrimination in mortgage lending by a number of banks, the OCC filed a federal lawsuit to stop the investigation.

Throughout our battles with the OCC and the banks, the mantra of the banks and their defenders was that efforts to curb predatory lending would deny access to credit to the very consumers the states were trying to protect. But the curbs we sought on predatory and unfair lending would have in no way jeopardized access to the legitimate credit market for appropriately priced loans. Instead, they would have stopped the scourge of predatory lending practices that have resulted in countless thousands of consumers losing their homes and put our economy in a precarious position.

When history tells the story of the subprime lending crisis and recounts its devastating effects on the lives of so many innocent homeowners, the Bush administration will not be judged favorably. The tale is still unfolding, but when the dust settles, it will be judged as a willing accomplice to the lenders who went to any lengths in their quest for profits. So willing, in fact, that it used the power of the federal government in an unprecedented assault on state legislatures, as well as on state attorneys general and anyone else on the side of consumers.
www.globalresearch.ca/index.php?context=va&aid=8330

[blackbear]

NY Governor Spitzer Linked to Prostitution Ring

http://www.rigorousintuition.ca/board/viewforum.php?f=8&sid=3a3c18e3a4 9c131a65698d9af8b7965a

Interesting comments:

AlicetheKurious

America: where illicit sex is the fast-track to oblivion, but lying to commit war crimes, killing and maiming millions of people, gutting the constitution and stealing billions of dollars, gets you a promotion and a raise.

What a strange country.

Client Number Six is the Duke of Westminster, called the richest man in the UK.

This is getting pretty good.

http://www.nydailynews.com/news/us_world/2008/03/12/2008-03-12_richest _man_in_england_also_a_regular_of.html

Richest man in England also a regular of prostitution ring in Spitzer scandal

Rich pickings for a prostitution ring headed by a man with not one, but TWO Israeli passports, according to the NY Post :

Authorities raided Brener's home early yesterday and found $600,000 in cash and 19,000 in Euros in various safes, prosecutors said.

Brener, they said, had two Israeli passports in addition to his US passport.

[blackbear]

An interesting thread at......

NY Governor Spitzer Linked to Prostitution Ring..130 replies

http://www.rigorousintuition.ca/board/viewforum.php?f=8&sid=1456f33e49 458a4aedaf99fa5ba14dcb

[kbo234]

The $200 billion bail-out for predator banks and Spitzer charges are intimately linked

By Greg Palast
Reporting for Air America Radio’s Clout

March 14th, 2008



While New York Governor Eliot Spitzer was paying an ‘escort’ $4,300 in a hotel room in Washington, just down the road, George Bush’s new Federal Reserve Board Chairman, Ben Bernanke, was secretly handing over $200 billion in a tryst with mortgage bank industry speculators.

Both acts were wanton, wicked and lewd. But there’s a BIG difference. The Governor was using his own checkbook. Bush’s man Bernanke was using ours.

This week, Bernanke’s Fed, for the first time in its history, loaned a selected coterie of banks one-fifth of a trillion dollars to guarantee these banks’ mortgage-backed junk bonds. The deluge of public loot was an eye-popping windfall to the very banking predators who have brought two million families to the brink of foreclosure.

Up until Wednesday, there was one single, lonely politician who stood in the way of this creepy little assignation at the bankers’ bordello: Eliot Spitzer.

Who are they kidding? Spitzer’s lynching and the bankers’ enriching are intimately tied.

How? Follow the money.

The press has swallowed Wall Street’s line that millions of US families are about to lose their homes because they bought homes they couldn’t afford or took loans too big for their wallets. Ba-LON-ey. That’s blaming the victim.

Here’s what happened. Since the Bush regime came to power, a new species of loan became the norm, the ‘sub-prime’ mortgage and its variants including loans with teeny “introductory” interest rates. From out of nowhere, a company called ‘Countrywide’ became America’s top mortgage lender, accounting for one in five home loans, a large chunk of these ‘sub-prime.’

Here’s how it worked: The Grinning Family, with US average household income, gets a $200,000 mortgage at 4% for two years. Their $955 monthly payment is 25% of their income. No problem. Their banker promises them a new mortgage, again at the cheap rate, in two years. But in two years, the promise ain’t worth a can of spam and the Grinnings are told to scram - because their house is now worth less than the mortgage. Now, the mortgage hits 9% or $1,609 plus fees to recover the “discount” they had for two years. Suddenly, payments equal 42% to 50% of pre-tax income. The Grinnings move into their Toyota.

Now, what kind of American is ‘sub-prime.’ Guess. No peeking. Here’s a hint: 73% of HIGH INCOME Black and Hispanic borrowers were given sub-prime loans versus 17% of similar-income Whites. Dark-skinned borrowers aren’t stupid – they had no choice. They were ‘steered’ as it’s called in the mortgage sharking business.

‘Steering,’ sub-prime loans with usurious kickers, fake inducements to over-borrow, called ‘fraudulent conveyance’ or ‘predatory lending’ under US law, were almost completely forbidden in the olden days (Clinton Administration and earlier) by federal regulators and state laws as nothing more than fancy loan-sharking.

But when the Bush regime took over, Countrywide and its banking brethren were told to party hearty – it was OK now to steer’m, fake’m, charge’m and take’m.

But there was this annoying party-pooper. The Attorney General of New York, Eliot Spitzer, who sued these guys to a fare-thee-well. Or tried to.

Instead of regulating the banks that had run amok, Bush’s regulators went on the warpath against Spitzer and states attempting to stop predatory practices. Making an unprecedented use of the legal power of “federal pre-emption,” Bush-bots ordered the states to NOT enforce their consumer protection laws.

Indeed, the feds actually filed a lawsuit to block Spitzer’s investigation of ugly racial mortgage steering. Bush’s banking buddies were especially steamed that Spitzer hammered bank practices across the nation using New York State laws.

Spitzer not only took on Countrywide, he took on their predatory enablers in the investment banking community. Behind Countrywide was the Mother Shark, its funder and now owner, Bank of America. Others joined the sharkfest: Goldman Sachs, Merrill Lynch and Citigroup’s Citibank made mortgage usury their major profit centers. They did this through a bit of financial legerdemain called “securitization.”

What that means is that they took a bunch of junk mortgages, like the Grinning’s, loans about to go down the toilet and re-packaged them into “tranches” of bonds which were stamped “AAA” - top grade - by bond rating agencies. These gold-painted turds were sold as sparkling safe investments to US school district pension funds and town governments in Finland (really).

When the housing bubble burst and the paint flaked off, investors were left with the poop and the bankers were left with bonuses. Countrywide’s top man, Angelo Mozilo, will ‘earn’ a $77 million buy-out bonus this year on top of the $656 million - over half a billion dollars – he pulled in from 1998 through 2007.

But there were rumblings that the party would soon be over. Angry regulators, burned investors and the weight of millions of homes about to be boarded up were causing the sharks to sink. Countrywide’s stock was down 50%, and Citigroup was off 38%, not pleasing to the Gulf sheiks who now control its biggest share blocks.

Then, on Wednesday of this week, the unthinkable happened. Carlyle Capital went bankrupt. Who? That’s Carlyle as in Carlyle Group. James Baker, Senior Counsel. Notable partners, former and past: George Bush, the Bin Laden family and more dictators, potentates, pirates and presidents than you can count.

The Fed had to act. Bernanke opened the vault and dumped $200 billion on the poor little suffering bankers. They got the public treasure – and got to keep the Grinning’s house. There was no ‘quid’ of a foreclosure moratorium for the ‘pro quo’ of public bailout. Not one family was saved – but not one banker was left behind.

Every mortgage sharking operation shot up in value. Mozilo’s Countrywide stock rose 17% in one day. The Citi sheiks saw their company’s stock rise $10 billion in an afternoon.

And that very same day the bail-out was decided – what a coinkydink! – the man called, ‘The Sheriff of Wall Street’ was cuffed. Spitzer was silenced.

Do I believe the banks called Justice and said, “Take him down today!” Naw, that’s not how the system works. But the big players knew that unless Spitzer was taken out, he would create enough ruckus to spoil the party. Headlines in the financial press – one was “Wall Street Declares War on Spitzer” - made clear to Bush’s enforcers at Justice who their number one target should be. And it wasn’t Bin Laden.

It was the night of February 13 when Spitzer made the bone-headed choice to order take-out in his Washington Hotel room. He had just finished signing these words for the Washington Post about predatory loans:

“Not only did the Bush administration do nothing to protect consumers, it embarked on an aggressive and unprecedented campaign to prevent states from protecting their residents from the very problems to which the federal government was turning a blind eye.”

Bush, Spitzer said right in the headline, was the “Predator Lenders’ Partner in Crime.” The President, said Spitzer, was a fugitive from justice. And Spitzer was in Washington to launch a campaign to take on the Bush regime and the biggest financial powers on the planet.

Spitzer wrote, “When history tells the story of the subprime lending crisis and recounts its devastating effects on the lives of so many innocent homeowners the Bush administration will not be judged favorably.”

But now, the Administration can rest assured that this love story – of Bush and his bankers - will not be told by history at all – now that the Sheriff of Wall Street has fallen on his own gun.

A note on “Prosecutorial Indiscretion.”

Back in the day when I was an investigator of racketeers for government, the federal prosecutor I was assisting was deciding whether to launch a case based on his negotiations for airtime with 60 Minutes. I’m not allowed to tell you the prosecutor’s name, but I want to mention he was recently seen shouting, “Florida is Rudi country! Florida is Rudi country!”

Not all crimes lead to federal bust or even public exposure. It’s up to something called “prosecutorial discretion.”

Funny thing, this ‘discretion.’ For example, Senator David Vitter, Republican of Louisiana, paid Washington DC prostitutes to put him in diapers (ewww!), yet the Senator was not exposed by the US prosecutors busting the pimp-ring that pampered him.
Naming and shaming and ruining Spitzer – rarely done in these cases - was made at the ‘discretion’ of Bush’s Justice Department.

Or maybe we should say, ‘indiscretion.’

[conspiracy analyst]

Probably the closest movie ever to the current state of affairs with the difference being the focus now is on the 'war on terror' and 'muslims' as opposed to bank robberies...

The Bank Job

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Bank_Job


Most truthers need to seriously see this film.
Based on a true story it uncovers the role of MI5 operatives in being involved in doing bank robberies, half the police force being on the take in Soho and posh brothels keeping a tab on Cabinet ministers by photographing them in compromising positions.

It also shows the Royal Family deep in the muck.

By coincidence the Spitzer Scandal appears to be identical. Although the film is based in London the early 1970's it appears this is a modus operandi of security services. To be high up in politics they have dirt on you.

When you dont do as asked they drop you in the s***

[conspiracy analyst]

The original roots to the 9/11 Conspiracy?

This date is too close a call!!!

---------------------------------------------------------------------- -------------------

The film is in part based on historical facts. A gang tunnelled into a branch of Lloyds Bank at the intersection of Baker Street and Marylebone Road, in London, on the night of 11 September 1971

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Bank_Job

[Alulim]

[conspiracy analyst]

[blackbear]

Maybe of interest:

Governor Eliot Spitzer may have been trapped in an Israeli government sex operation

Filed under Israeli politics, Jewish diaspora, Opinion Editorials, Jewish organisations worldwide, Mossad/Israeli intelligence, USA foreign policy, Sex industry, US elections - on Friday, March 14, 2008 - By: Martin, Andy

“THE MOSSAD’S FINGERPRINTS ARE ALL OVER THIS ONE,” SAYS ANDY MARTIN

THE COMBINATION OF INTERNATIONAL SEX AND MONEY LAUNDERING ARE CLASSIC CLUES THAT ISRAELI INTELLIGENCE WAS TROLLING FOR BLACKMAIL TARGETS, OFFERING PROTECTION IN EXCHANGE FOR SEXUAL DOSSIERS

New York Governor Eliot Spitzer may have stumbled into a prostitution ring run under the auspices of the Israeli government, namely the Mossad, says Andy Martin.

“The Emperors Club was exclusively targeting prominent individuals,”

ContrarianCommentary.com executive editor Andy Martin notes. “It is entirely possible that Spitzer was assured that his participation in the prostitution ring was protected precisely because it was run by an Israeli asset.

“Israel is the bane of U. S. federal authorities that combat money laundering. Tel Aviv is one of the money laundering capitals of the world. Mark Brener, who ran Emperors Club VIP, was an Israeli citizen; he was stockpiling two Israeli passports in his apartment. He also had $600,000 in cash on hand. Prosecutors appear to have moved in because the FBI was concerned Brener was about to make a drop in Israel. Published reports significantly understate the financial operations of this international prostitution operation.

“People don’t like to talk about it but sexual entrapment and fulfillment are some of the basic forms of espionage and blackmail. Straight and gay ‘partners,’ ‘rough stuff’ and more are all kept at the ready by the world’s major intelligence agencies. Mark Brener does not appear to have been a spy per se. He appears to have traded information for immunity and money laundering. But he could have been a low-level type of ‘sleeper cell,’ an asset that operated quietly and obviously without any official cover.

“The volume of electronic surveillance is a clear tip-off that the Department of Justice knew they were working with a ‘connected’ prostitution operation. Thousands of calls and e-mails were monitored in a brief period. No one monitoring that volume of traffic was focused only on Eliot Spitzer. The claim that the probe began with him is thus somewhat disingenuous; investigators were quickly casting a much wider net.

“Because the federal government did not want to be caught in an embarrassing Jonathan Pollard moment again, prosecutors asked that Brener be detained without bail. Although Israelis are barred from intelligence operations in the United States, they are addicted to surveillance and penetration inside our society and institutions. Illinoisans on the other hand are obsessed with the identity of ‘Client 10.’ Well. [See: http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/opinion/chi-0313edit1mar13,0,257499 .story.]

“We don’t yet have the ‘smoking gun’ on this one but our sources within Israel confirm that we are on the right track. Sex for information for money for protection is a classic Mossad m.o. Brener was laundering the cash in Israel where large sums would not draw attention, particularly when deposited in government-influenced banks. This is a sensitive case.

“Significantly, the Spitzer sex sting has been handled very gingerly by Israeli media. The coverage is extremely subdued for news involving one of the highest elected Jewish officials in the United States, who was priming himself to be the first Jewish president,” says Martin. “It is almost as though they are aware of the submerged Israeli intelligence angle to the story, and are working to put some hard facts on the circumstantial evidence. ...

http://www.israelenews.com/view.asp?ID=1419

[Alulim]

[Alulim]

[outsider]

Another interesting link:

http://www.truefacts.co.uk/articles/spitzer.html

[Alulim]

The Spitzer scandal should be used to our benefit. Anytime someone brings up Spitzer, bring up his helping Silverstein win his insurance settlement. Then mention Spitzer's ties to Hauer and Kroll. IOW, use Spitzer as a shoe-in to 9/11 related topics.

And, BTW, how many other people go beyond the echo-chamber of boards such as this one to post about 9/11? This Spitzer scandal offers a great opportunity to legitimately bring up 9/11 in the context of currently topical discussions in many places on the Internet. Seize it!

[Alulim]

The previous message in this thread does not belong here. It is obviously a different topic from the mere discussion of the connection between Sliverstein and Spitzer. Does anybody know where Anthonly Lawson is now posting?

[conspiracy analyst]

LaRouche on Spitzer Case: Targetting the Superdelegates

March 14, 2008 (EIRNS)--This release was issued on March 13 by Lyndon LaRouche Political Action Committee (LPAC).

Lyndon LaRouche was asked to comment on the targetting of New York Governor Eliot Spitzer during his webcast of March 12. His response:

LaRouche: I think, as I know politics, and I know people, and I know business, I don't think that there are many politicians in this country, who have achieved relatively high office, who aren't keeping herds of pigs in their closets. I don't think that organized-crime allows anybody to become their boy, without getting them to commit something they can use against them when they want to in the future. That's the way it works. I don't think that people trust anybody, some people, don't trust anybody, to promote them unless they've got something on them, beforehand, to control them, to threaten them. I would say, "Check everybody's closet."

Now, when you look at it that way, as I look at it because I have some experience in these matters—I've experienced some very nasty frauds and know how they're struck, when the Federal Department of Justice and others create them, hmm, in the name of justice. But, when you look at that, you say, "Why would they come up with something out of the Hell-box, at this time, and to what end?" Well, he had just confirmed an endorsement of Hillary Clinton, which he had made, in a sense, earlier, but he'd been pressured to withdraw that and change it. And when he refused to, a couple of days later—Boom!—what happened? Gee whiz! They had something on him, in the Hell-box, and they brought it forward. And said, "Git, git! And the next guy who refuses to take our orders better learn the lesson." You should ask, who's the next target?

I don't think Spitzer has any particular claim on anything of that sort. I think the number of sex freaks in the Congress probably vastly outnumbers—[laughter]— I mean, this is not real! When people fall for this thing, say, "Okay, when did these guys know about this? They got this woman in the closet, huh? They got a number for her, Number something or other. How long did they have that number? Was it somebody in the Department of Justice, of the Bush Department of Justice? Was it somebody else? Why would they have this? Why did they rush to get this into the press now? Why didn't they report it when they had the information? Why did they wait?" So therefore, maybe the people you ought to convict, are the people who sprang this scandal.

Not that I recommend their doing that kind of thing. It's not a nice thing to do, particularly if you're on the public till, because it impinges on your reputation. But! I know politics. I don't know how many other politicians in this country could escape some similar kind of problem. Why? Because that's the system. Not only organized crime, but intelligence services and others, as I know first hand: Before they promote somebody, they make them "trustworthy," by compiling evidence which could hang them any time they get out of line. That's the way politics works. So, I would say, let's open all the closets! Say, "If you've got something you think you ought to confess, confess now! Let's all get out there and have this confessional. A good old-time revival meeting, let's everybody confess! Let's have an official agency to register confessions!" [laughter]

So therefore, when you get a scandal like this, you can assess the situation based on what's going on in society. Well, what I know, this society is immensely corrupt, and people in power are the most likely targets to be entrapped into something which can be interpreted as corruption. We don't have the kind of system that's an honest system, and we have to think about things that way.

The first thing I would say is, I want an inquiry. Okay, Spitzer was called forward. I want to know, on what date did you have this information? Who did you get it from, and on what date? Then ask him: Okay, you passed this information on? Yes. When did you have it? Or, why did you all come forward now, at this particular moment, when he had just confirmed an endorsement of Hillary Clinton? You got the New York Times, all of these people are out there saying, "Ooohh! He's a terrible man, a terrible man." I don't think he's a terrible man. I think he's a typical politician. There are very few exceptions to that, I tell you.

[outsider]

[acrobat74]

Copying from the article above:

[outsider]

New York Times: 'No Federal charges against Spitzer':

http://cityroom.blogs.nytimes.com/2008/11/06/no-federal-charges-agains t-spitzer/?hp

[The Watcher]

Acrobat74 wrote:

[acrobat74]

Posted: Fri Mar 21, 2008