Grimis
Scrapple
Level: 122
   
Posts: 286/4700
EXP: 20293293
For next: 344779
Since: 11.7.02
From: MD
Since last post: 749 days
Last activity: 546 days
|  #1 Posted on 6.9.02 0934.18
Reposted on: 6.9.09 0947.11 | OK, here's a test for the lefties out there. How do you really feel about this article: Click Here
Yes this is a test.
| Promote this thread! |             | OlFuzzyBastard
Knackwurst
Level: 101
Posts: 386/3013
EXP: 10512720
For next: 204992
Since: 28.4.02
From: Pittsburgh, PA
Since last post: 48 days
Last activity: 13 hours
| AIM: |  |
| | |
| #2 Posted on 6.9.02 2112.34
Reposted on: 6.9.09 2114.29 | I hate to say it, but I'm completely ignorant on financial matters and would be the absolute worst person to comment on this thread. You might say that hasn't stopped me in any of the other threads, and I might say "touche", but...
Just don't want to seem like I'm ignoring it. | Jaguar
Knackwurst
Level: 105
Posts: 775/3272
EXP: 12035605
For next: 226695
Since: 23.1.02
From: Phoenix, AZ
Since last post: 594 days
Last activity: 594 days
| #3 Posted on 6.9.02 2248.23
Reposted on: 6.9.09 2248.26 | The first time I read it, I switched into "Skimming Mode" about halfway through, so when I feel a little more dedicated I'll go through it again. The main thing is that I haven't seen these allegations in print anywhere else, so I wish they made it easier to seperate the 'facts' of the article with opinion. But like I said, I'll read it again tonight or tomorrow.
-Jag | chazerizer
Italian
Level: 34
Posts: 160/242
EXP: 237099
For next: 16555
Since: 11.7.02
From: Pittsburgh, PA
Since last post: 3870 days
Last activity: 326 days
| AIM: |  |
| | |
| #4 Posted on 7.9.02 0154.16
Reposted on: 7.9.09 0159.05 | I have two questions
1) What kind of newspaper in The Washington Times? Are they known for being Left, Right, or Middle? I know, officially, there is no stance, but every paper goes one way or the other.
2) Is this a joke? If its not a joke then there's something screwed up about it, either the mindset of the author, or the actual situation. If it is, then, whatever.
I find it hard to make solid decisions based on a single source. | astrobstrd
Bockwurst
Level: 51
Posts: 218/612
EXP: 967831
For next: 46114
Since: 13.3.02
From: Loveland, OH
Since last post: 2060 days
Last activity: 2027 days
| AIM: |  |
| | |
| #5 Posted on 7.9.02 1817.11
Reposted on: 7.9.09 1819.56 | Sorry, an opinion piece by a senior fellow on a conservative think-tank holds about as much water with me as a scientology pamphlet. Find a factual piece, or even a piece by someone who doesn't also have a C.S. Lewis fanboy page on his orginization's site, and I'll bother thinking about it.
www.discovery.org
I love the completely vague mission statement, too.
(edited by astrobstrd on 7.9.02 1917) | MoeGates
Andouille
Level: 86
Posts: 604/2075
EXP: 6090572
For next: 51559
Since: 6.1.02
From: Brooklyn, NY
Since last post: 8 days
Last activity: 1 day
| #6 Posted on 8.9.02 0007.30
Reposted on: 8.9.09 0029.03 | | Well, after trying to shove "Washington Post" and 'Cato Institute (even though they're sometimes reasonable)" out of my head and keep an open mind, I read the article. My initial reaction was a reinforcement of the idea that conservatives only care about "freedoms" when they affect rich people. | Gavintzu
Summer sausage
Level: 44
Posts: 163/443
EXP: 601122
For next: 10167
Since: 2.1.02
From: Calgary ... Alberta Canada
Since last post: 2346 days
Last activity: 2346 days
|  #7 Posted on 8.9.02 2159.59
Reposted on: 8.9.09 2209.31 | Okay, I decided to take the test. I read the article and consulted the FATF homepage too, for some balance.
A few thoughts.
- Why is this a test for "lefties"? I suppose some New York Liberals like Hillary Clinton would be happy with this attempt to give bureaucrats lots of power and work to do. But what about "lefties" who, for example, protest against Big Business at the G8 meetings? Why would this make them happy? I would think rather that they would be just as displeased as Richard Rahn and the Cato Institute is about the situation.
- All in all, for Richard Rahn it seems to boil down to an anti-One World Government rant. I'm not too sure why so many "righties" in the States hate the UN and other international bodies, but I sure caught a whiff of "this is a plot by the Illuminati and the Masons in their G8 headquarters for taking over the world" vibe to the article. But maybe I'm just imagining that.
- Rahn states: "The FATF proposals will result in millions of needless property crimes and tens of thousands of murders that could be avoided, all to make it a little more inconvenient for a few money launderers." Overstating your case just a touch Richard? That's a sign that he is not too confident of the ground he is standing on.
- Rahn also states: "The FATF demands that lawyers, accountants, real estate agents and those engaged in selling any expensive item such as jewelry and automobiles spy and report on their clients for "suspicious activities." In many countries like the United States, such activities by non-law enforcement personnel are considered (for good reasons) inappropriate and in many cases illegal or unconstitutional." Okay, but isn't this similar to the snitch plan that the Dubya admin had unveiled a few months ago to fight domestic terrorism? The one with the hot lines for posties to call if they hear someone talking Arabic in their apartments? Where was the Cato Institute then, I ask you? (I have no idea myself, but I'm sure they were fighting that plan tooth and nail ;))
- And according to the FATF 40 recommendations,
"Recommendation 32
Each country should make efforts to improve a spontaneous or "upon request" international information exchange relating to suspicious transactions, persons and corporations involved in those transactions between competent authorities. Strict safeguards should be established to ensure that this exchange of information is consistent with national and international provisions on privacy and data protection."
That's it. If you read the website there is really nothing that outlandish. It's all about fighting money laundering (which is a huge problem in the world), and not really about "kidnapping rich Americans when they travel to the Third World on vacation, then killing their wife and children." Unless you really distrust international organizations, that is. (Soon the UN will make it illegal to spank your children, you know).
Sadly, I think I fail the test. Damn.
| Grimis
Scrapple
Level: 122
Posts: 290/4700
EXP: 20293293
For next: 344779
Since: 11.7.02
From: MD
Since last post: 749 days
Last activity: 546 days
| #8 Posted on 9.9.02 0612.17
Reposted on: 9.9.09 0616.14 | My main problem with all of this(and the reason I posted it) was a sovereignty issue. The FATF recommendations include this little nugget;
Recommendation 2
Financial institution secrecy laws should be conceived so as not to inhibit implementation of these recommendations.
I'm not particularly comfortable with handing over sovereignty over the financial records of our citizens to an extranational organization. Especially considering that fact that sovereign governments will attempt to access the information for less than scrupulous reasons.
My initial reaction was a reinforcement of the idea that conservatives only care about "freedoms" when they affect rich people.
Desperately trying to figure out how this affects only rich people. | Jaguar
Knackwurst
Level: 105
Posts: 782/3272
EXP: 12035605
For next: 226695
Since: 23.1.02
From: Phoenix, AZ
Since last post: 594 days
Last activity: 594 days
| #9 Posted on 9.9.02 1227.36
Reposted on: 9.9.09 1229.06 | You can extrapolate this bit, though I'm not sure it's entirely accurate:
The FATF are trying to stop Money Launderers. People who launder money usually do it in large amounts, making them "Rich". So trying to stop the FATF from stopping Money Launderers is equal to trying to stop the FATF from messing with the rich people of the world.
-Jag | | ALL ORIGINAL POSTS IN THIS THREAD ARE NOW AVAILABLE |
| | | | | | | | | |
