Rat Leaves Sinking Ship

Jake DeSantis, an executive vice president of the American International Group’s financial products unit, sent a letter on Tuesday to Edward M. Liddy, the chief executive of A.I.G. The letter was published on 25th March in the New York Times . The fact that the letter was published in the New York Times appears strange, since most letters of resignation are not publicised. Maybe he was doing a Pontius Pilate, and washing his hands in public.

Mr. DeSantis, who has worked for the company for 11 years, explained that he felt unable to continue working for the company which he called dysfunctional, and that he and his staff in the financial products unit had been betrayed by A.I.G and unfairly persecuted by elected officials. He goes on to state that his unit was not responsible for the credit default swap transactions that have hamstrung AIG. He will not be returning his bonus, as requested, but after the tax has been taken off he is going to give it to charity, to 'those most affected by the economic downturn'. His intent is not to keep a single cent of the money for himself and his family.

He also states that he feels that Mr. Liddy, the chief executive of A.I.G., was not responsible for the mismanagement at A.I.G either.

Which begs the question, what are these high paid executives actually being paid for? Mr. DeSantis has worked the last year for a $1.00 fee, on the understanding that he would receive a bonus payment in March of this year. In view of the fact that the company was being dismantled where exactly did he think the profits were that would pay his bonus? Surely bonus payments are being paid at the end of a financial year based on the performance of the company paying the bonus. Of course, he thought the bonus payment would come from the American Taxpayer, his bonus actually being paid out of the BailOut Fund which is American Taxpayers' money.

So for 10 years Mr. DeSantis worked for a dysfunctional company that was creating an artificial finance bubble, but he failed to see that and he was in no way shape or form responsible for that. So what did he see? He must either be very gullible, in which case one wonders how he ever made it to vice executive, or he is a hypocrite, who now that the A.I.G. ship is sinking fast does what most rats do.

Needless to say, the readers 'comments in the New York Times were many, and the discussion is now closed, so no further comments can be added to it.

Perhaps the most succinct statement of all is from Rolf, New York
' Hint : If your company accepts tens of millions of dollars from taxpayers, consider your bonus renegotiated'

Well said Rolf, I am sure most taxpayers will agree with you on that.

Pope Hampers Health Promotion

Pope Benedict XVI is currently visiting Africa. Whilst on the plane flying to Africa he pronounced that the use of condoms remains against the doctrine of the Catholic Church (as set out in the Encyclical 'Humanae Vitae' , 1968).

He is quoted as saying that 'Aids cannot be overcome through the distribution of condoms, which even aggravates the problem'. This latter statement is completely wrong as the majority of scientists agree that the consistent and correct use of condoms substantially reduces the spread of Aids. It would be interesting to know what research the Pope is quoting when he made that statement.

The UN programme against Aids says that condoms are an essential part of combination prevention. Several Aids activists as well as the French and Belgian government have expressed grave concern at the Pope's statements, in exactly that continent where Hiv and Aids are of pandemic proportions, which unfortunately is also the continent where the Pope remains quite popular.

The Pope of course has the right (vested in him by the Catholic Church) to make statements on Church Doctrine, but unless he can show evidence of research that shows that condoms aggravate the problem, he really does need to retract that statement.

The situation is that condoms are expressely forbidden because they are a form of birth control, (within what the Church considers it rightful area of expertise) but that condoms are an essential part of the combination prevention for HIV.

If people as a consequence of the Pope's statement stop using condoms, this means that more babies will be born that are HIV positive. This is obviously something that the Pope feels he can live with, although he did say that he is suffering with the poor of Africa. That should make them feel a lot better, hopefully it means that he will be distributing the estimated $10 - $15 billion Vatican wealth very soon amongst the poor and needy.

Or maybe he will buy a drug company that enables the people suffering from Aids that he is so concerned about, to have free drug treatment. At the moment 70% of people who are HIV positive on the African subcontinent, die as a consequence of the disease. The cost of drug treatment is prohibitive for most African countries.

As a very lapsed Catholic I have no problem with the Pope making his doctrinal statements, but I feel he has to keep out of the issue of Health Promotion, particularly as he is not offering any evidence of his statement. Come on Pope, you talk about religion and God, and let everyone else make pronouncements on their areas of expertise.

Do as I say, not as I Do - or maybe not

The UK Labour Government has once again shown itself to be incapable of passing a law and then applying it. For nearly two years now smoking in public places in England has been illegal. This means that the person enjoying a pint of beer and wanting to smoke whilst doing so, has to stand outside and smoke. Some places however are exempt.

Prisons are exempt, they have special smoking rooms. However, Old People's Homes are not allowed to have smoking rooms and any Nursing Home owner who provides a place for his elderly residents to have a smoke, can be fined. This therefore means that elderly and infirm people who want to have a smoke need to be outside (possibly in the cold) to enjoy a cigarette, but prisoners can smoke in warm smoking rooms.

Palaces are also exempt. Because the Houses of Parliament in England is officially the Palace of Westminster, this means that the same ministers who passed the smoking in the workplace ban, are the only people who are not affected by that ban themselves.

The Guardian now reports that for the G20 meeting which is to take place in the UK at the beginning of April, the smoking ban will be lifted and special rooms will be set aside for G20 members who want to enjoy a smoke. Now, this may not be true. Apparently the rumour was first circulated in that much respected newspaper The Sun (more known for its bare-breasted beauties on page 3 than for reporting on the news), taken up by another newspaper and circulated as fact, and now the Guardian, a broadsheet newspaper no less, has taken up the story. The MailOnline reports the story and quotes Anne Widdecombe, MP (Cons) as saying 'It is one law for one, and one for the other, and I think that sums up this Government'. This makes me think that there possibly is some truth in the rumour that is circulating about this temporary lifting of the smoking ban.

I doubt whether we will ever be told whether or not the G20 meeting venue provided rooms for those who wished to indulge, but I think it may be quite likely. How do you tell the Finance Minister of another country that he has to step outside to have a smoke? Apparently, it is easier to stop an old person from smoking and facing the fact that they have to go outside to do so, than it is to stop a Minister or a prisoner from smoking in comfort. Double standards anyone?

Wake up World - Obama is a Sham

Barack Obama, new President of the USA comes across as a charistmatic, caring man, who made multiple promises before his election on the withdrawal of troops from Iraq, the repeal of the Patriot Act, the pursuing of legal action against telephone companies that had illegally wire-tapped American Citizens under the provisions of the Patriot Act, and the repeal of the free trade agreements - in order to protect the workers in the US.

To put it very succinctly, this man is a consumate charismatic liar, who has been carefully groomed for power over the last 30 years, and been chosen by the real powers in the world, i.e. The Bilderberg Group (130 of the richest and most influential people in the world, started by the Nazi Prince of the Netherlands Bernhard); The Trilateral Commission and the Council on Foreign Relations. These three institutions run the world, or more precisely own the world.

You can view a very powerful film on this here

If you were a member of Pyrabang, of course, you might already know all this :)

If you found this interesting, why not join us at Pyrabang, and get some more in-depth information from the other side of the news. Joining Pyrabang takes 10 seconds and you can do it here

See you at the Other Side of the News

The truth is out there, but only if you know where to find it

There is increasing evidence that most of the major world media are in the hands of a few families. I do not want to bore you with an elaborate explanation of why this is so, suffice it to say that what you read in the papers or see on the television has been censored before you are allowed access to it.

Unfortunately this means that few of us ever have access to all sides of a story. The internet seemed to provide a means where independent journalists from round the world could voice their story, without editorial disapproval. Even the internet however is censored, and people like Jeff Rense and various other commentators are having to keep moving Hosting Companies in order to get their point of view across.

Now, you may or may not agree with what Rense has to say, it does not really matter. The fact is, that we are allowed to express our opinions freely and people have the right to read those opinions and agree or disagree with them.

It is therefore refreshing to find a site like Pyrabang, where in addition to people posting advertisements for their business opportunity, a little search of the archives will find many articles and films relating to the Other Side of the News. I have spent many hours reading posts and watching videos, and although obviously you have to use your own discretion on what you believe and what you discard, at least it wil give us a choice about what we read and view, rather than just watching what the mainstream media label news.

I recommend you have a look next time you see the ad for Pyrabang popping up somewhere. Yes, you can earn money on Pyrabang as well, but even if that is not your main intent, just joining to get access to the wealth of information that is there is worth doing.

My link for Pyrabang is http://pyrabang.com/go/sekhmetgb

May see you there :)