Unlimited Wikileaks Shenanigans

[BadBeast]

A little bit at a time. When nobody is around.


Source; "Strickland Propane, and Propane accessories. Ask for Hank"

[Prince Glittersnatch III]

A little bit at a time. When nobody is around.


Source; "Strickland Propane, and Propane accessories. Ask for Hank"

[BadBeast]

Well, Fuck my old boots!  How's that for synchronicity?

[The Johnny]

You sure you never saw that strip before?

[BadBeast]

Totally sure. I just think of Hank Hill whenever I see or hear anyone say Propane.

[Chairman Risus]

Totally sure. I just think of Hank Hill whenever I see or hear anyone say Propane.

                Dammit, BadBeast.
                                   \\
               

[BadBeast]

Totally sure. I just think of Hank Hill whenever I see or hear anyone say Propane.

                Dammit, BadBeast.
                                   \\
               

"And Peggy Hill has got big feet"!

[Cain]

/re-jack

One of my favourite sources for everything meant to be classified, Anti-Fascist Calling, has a new piece up on leaked cables and what they reveal about R. Allen Stanford, banker, fraudster and suspected CIA financier.

While R. Allen Stanford was happily ensconced on the Caribbean island of Antigua, allegedly bribing officials there as he expanded his banking empire, secret cables released by the whistleblowing web site WikiLeaks revealed that U.S. Embassy officials held themselves at arm's length even as they provided the accused fraudster with political cover.

As Antifascist Calling reported last summer, Stanford International Bank (SIB) and Stanford Financial Group (SFG), once conservatively valued at $50 billion, were no more legitimate than penny stock frauds or advance fee scams on the internet. To make matters worse, for years federal regulators turned a blind eye towards the bank's reckless practices.

As it turns out, so too did the U.S. Embassy.

Cablegate file 06BRIDGETOWN755, "Cricket Breakfast Serves Up First Encounter with Allen Stanford," dated 03 May 2006, revealed that "Ambassador Kramer met controversial Texan billionaire Allen Stanford for the first time at an April 21 'Legends of Cricket' breakfast in Barbados."

The confidential embassy cable reported that "Stanford bent the Ambassador's ear concerning his significant new tourism and property investments in Antigua and plans for his Caribbean Star and Caribbean Sun airlines."

The occasion for the meeting, an inadvertent encounter if the embassy's account is to be believed, was an April 21, 2006 breakfast at the Barbados Hilton.

Stanford, who went on to donate some $20 million to the England and Wales Cricket Board, attended the lavish affair in the company of Barbados Prime Minister Owen Arthur, U.S. Ambassador Mary E. Kramer, assorted sports stars and local luminaries.

The cable averred that "Allen Stanford is a controversial Texan billionaire who has made significant investments in offshore finance, aviation, and property development in Antigua and throughout the region. His companies are rumored to engage in bribery, money laundering, and political manipulation."

Rumored by whom, one might reasonably ask? An important point since this was certainly not general knowledge at the time, particularly amongst those who were being fleeced.

But rather than blowing the whistle when it could have mattered most to investors and Antiguan citizens, the Bush-appointed official took cover. "Embassy officers do not reach out to Stanford" we read, "because of the allegations of bribery and money laundering. The Ambassador managed to stay out of any one-on-one photos with Stanford during the breakfast."

Why would Kramer have done otherwise? After all, as Secretary of State Hillary Clinton piously intoned last month denouncing WikiLeaks, "this is the role our diplomats play in serving America."

A "Unique Investment Strategy"

When "Sir Allen" was arrested in 2009, the federal indictment charged that the high-flying Texan had sold more than $7 billion in fraudulent certificates of deposit and some $1.2 billion in mutual funds.

The centerpiece of SIB's "unique investment strategy" were financial instruments that were claimed to be safe, liquid and redeemable at a moment's notice.

According to a blurb on the "Sir Allen Stanford" web site, the Stanford Financial Group "provides private and institutional investors with global expertise in asset allocation strategies, investment advisory services, equity research, international private banking and trust administration, commercial banking, investment banking, merchant banking, institutional sales and trading, real estate investment and insurance."

The reality was far different, however. In fact, the majority of Group "assets" were in very illiquid real estate holdings and private accounts managed by just two individuals, Allen Stanford and his college roommate, James M. Davis, the bank's chief financial officer.

According to federal prosecutors, accounts were divided into three tiers, I, II and III with Tier III accounts representing "more than 80% of the purported total value of SIBL's investments."

"STANFORD and DAVIS" the charge sheet reads, "directed, managed, and monitored ... the Tier III investments. According to internal SIBL documents, as of June 30, 2008, these Tier III investments comprised the majority of the purported value of SIBL's investment portfolio. Approximately 50% of the purported value of Tier III (approximately $3.2 billion) included investments in artificially valued real estate and approximately 30% of the purported value of Tier III (approximately $1.6 billion) included notes on personal loans to STANFORD. STANFORD, DAVIS and others did not disclose to, and actively concealed from, investors, SGC and SIBL employees, and others the fact that approximately $4.8 billion in purported Tier III investments consisted of such artificially valued real estate and notes on personal loans to STANFORD."

A sweet deal if you're in on the fix.

Lured by "high rates that exceed those available through true certificates of deposits offered by traditional banks," thousands of investors were indelicately relieved of their life savings. Of the more than $8 billion hoovered up by the banker and his cronies, only about $500 million has been recovered.

This raises the question: where did all that money go? Did it just simply vanish into thin air, secret Stanford accounts, or perhaps, was it diverted elsewhere by the banker's silent partners in a certain three-lettered agency?

When asked during a 2009 interview by CNBC's Scott Cohn whether he had been "helpful" to U.S. authorities in Latin America, Stanford replied, "Are you talking about the CIA?" Cohn: "Well, you tell me?" Stanford: "I'm just not going to talk about that."

Stanford's reticence to discuss possible Agency connections are certainly understandable.

We do know however, that like many dubious banking ventures before it, Stanford Financial Group had powerful friends in high places, in the White House, Congress, amongst regulatory agencies and, plausibly, the CIA; all of whom tripped over themselves furnishing Stanford's "family" of companies with a watertight "roof."

[The Johnny]

The case of Wikileaks founder, Julian Assange, is being transferred to the court of Belmarsh, south-east of London, to be treated as a matter of terrorism in January 11, when the next audience will take place.

[The Johnny]

Can anyone tell me why he fled to England instead of, say, Germany?

[Adios]

The case of the founder of WikiLeaks, Julian Assange, will be transferred to the court of Belmarsh in southeast London, to be treated as a matter of terrorism since January 11 when the next hearing will take place. Through WikiLeaks Twitter account, the site confirmed that a British court decided to transfer the case to court Assange Belmarsh, known for addressing questions related to terrorism. The change cut the suspicion that the British court will resume proceedings against the founder of WikiLeaks following the guidelines requested by the United States, according to reports from the BBC. In Belmarsh is a maximum-security prisons in the UK, which are held terrorism suspects without trial. Amnesty International (AI) considers the British Guantanamo. Assange be judged in terms of terrorism, detention and confinement may be immediate and would complicate his defense since the laws in the United Kingdom, following the attacks of September 11, 2001 in the United States, allows the arrest and detention of suspects . WikiLeaks founder, an Australian journalist of 39 years of age, could happen to accompany the 11 inmates currently in Belmarsh terror suspects and awaiting trial. Assange is currently on probation in the UK while continuing his extradition to Sweden, where it is needed to deal with alleged sexual assaults against two Swedish women last August.
The next hearing in the extradition process to Sweden Assange is scheduled for Jan. 11, but until now known to be held in the court of Westminster, London. Assange has claimed that he and other members of WikiLeaks have received death threats since the site began in late November last year to publish some of the 250,000 cable that lay bare the U.S. foreign policy.



Why hasn't any other news channel picked this up?

[Fujikoma]

I totally don't think he should be charged with terrorism, or anything, for that matter. But, I'm sure he knew they weren't going to take too kindly to him spilling the beans. Trouble is, their reaction is only going to make things worse for them.

[Cain]

They're not saying he's been charged with terrorism.

His case has been transferred to the Belmarsh court, a court (and prison with the same name) known for dealing primarily with terrorism and other "politically sensitive" cases.  Assange clearly falls into the latter.

[Triple Zero]

Why hasn't any other news channel picked this up?

Strange indeed. I checked the Guardian, and nothing.

But the twitter feed confirms:

http://twitter.com/wikileaks

and indeed links to the BBC article: http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/magazine/3714864.stm

reading now.

[Fujikoma]

They're not saying he's been charged with terrorism.

His case has been transferred to the Belmarsh court, a court (and prison with the same name) known for dealing primarily with terrorism and other "politically sensitive" cases.  Assange clearly falls into the latter.

Ah, I see... Pardon my jumping to conclusions, just after hearing what countless dumbfucks had to say about wikileaks I was a bit jumpy.