Wednesday, January 14, 2009

Future Madoff fun

A prominent Canadian tax lawyer weighs in on Madoff:
"Paul will not generally complain when one robs Peter to pay Paul. In this case, however, there could be worse news downstream for the investors who have already lost millions of dollars. An additional wrinkle to the scandal is the United States Federal Bankruptcy Court decision in the Bayou case. That case held that earlier investors must give back the money that they 'earned' from the Ponzi.

Payments by Mr. Madoff to the earlier investors were fraudulent conveyances - an illegal transfer of property with the intent of committing fraud. The earlier investors were, in fact - albeit innocently - beneficiaries of the fraudulent scheme. The investors must refund their improperly earned money into the pool of assets from which all - old and new - victims will share, if there is anything to share. Thus, we can expect to hear a lot of complaining from Paul."


Anonymous said...

Time for a pilgrimage to the holy land.

Anonymous said...

"You're a Jew? You can go to jail"-US Courts

Rowan Berkeley said...

This is slightly off topic, but important if correct: it seems to me that our jewish friends have sent a few provocateurs to infiltrate anti-israel marches in holland and shout "jews to the gas".

Anonymous said...

Yes, but i suppose this applies only to those "investors" who withdrew the principal and realized earnings before the pyramid collapsed.

For the greedy who remained collecting their 10% earnings until the bitter end, the lost of the principal may be greater than the earnings realized. Unless, of course, you are one of the greedy schmucks/shysters/shylocks who have been with Madoff since the beginning, 40 years ago, and had the chance to double their nominal invested capital every 6 years or so.

Anonymous said...

It occurred to me that Israel is the Perec Rachman and the Bernie Madoff of countries. Rachmanism and Ponzionism in one.

BTW, Xymph, I have no trouble using Firefox in your site.

Anonymous said...

Laurie (or Evie)

I always thought your real identity was this woman

Anonymous said...

Good comments here

Anonymous said...

Here in Canada, Jewish groups are trying to have demonstrations in support of the Palestinian people banned as hate propaganda.

Anonymous said...

If the matter is considered in the proper light, it's clear that Jews are really the victims.

Anonymous said...

traducteur, 6:49 AM, January 15, 2009.

That is what Xymph tried to warn all these years.

Anonymous said...

We the undersigned are all of Jewish origin. When we see the dead and bloodied bodies of young children, the cutting off of water, electricity and food, we are reminded of the siege of the Warsaw Ghetto. When Dov Weisglass, an adviser to the Israeli prime minister, Ehud Olmert, talked of putting Gazans "on a diet" and the deputy defence minister, Matan Vilnai, talked about the Palestinians experiencing "a bigger shoah" (holocaust), this reminds us of Governor General Hans Frank in Nazi-occupied Poland, who spoke of "death by hunger".

The real reason for the attack on Gaza is that Israel is only willing to deal with Palestinian quislings. The main crime of Hamas is not terrorism but its refusal to accept becoming a pawn in the hands of the Israeli occupation regime in Palestine.

The decision last month by the EU council to upgrade relations with Israel, without any specific conditions on human rights, has encouraged further Israeli aggression. The time for appeasing Israel is long past. As a first step, Britain must withdraw the British ambassador to Israel and, as with apartheid South Africa, embark on a programme of boycott, divestment and sanctions.

Letter sent to Guardian

Ben Birnberg, Prof Haim Bresheeth, Deborah Fink, Bella Freud, Tony Greenstein, Abe Hayeem, Prof Adah Kay, Yehudit Keshet, Dr Les Levidow, Prof Yosefa Loshitzky, Prof Moshe Machover, Miriam Margolyes, Prof Jonathan Rosenhead, Seymour Alexander, Ben Birnberg, Martin Birnstingl, Prof. Haim Bresheeth, Ruth Clark, Judith Cravitz, Mike Cushman, Angela Dale, Merav Devere, Greg Dropkin, Angela Eden, Sarah Ferner, Alf Filer, Mark Findlay, Sylvia Finzi, Bella Freud, Tessa van Gelderen, Claire Glasman, Ruth Hall, Adrian Hart, Alain Hertzmann, Abe Hayeem, Rosamene Hayeem, Anna Hellmann, Selma James, Riva Joffe, Yael Kahn, Michael Kalmanovitz, Ros Kane, Prof. Adah Kay, Yehudit Keshet, Mark Krantz, Bernice Laschinger, Pam Laurance, Dr Les Levidow, Prof. Yosefa Loshitzky, Prof. Moshe Machover, Beryl Maizels, Miriam Margolyes, Helen Marks, Martine Miel, Diana Neslen, O Neumann, Susan Pashkoff, Hon. Juliet Peston, Renate Prince, Roland Rance, Sheila Robin, Ossi Ron, Manfred Ropschitz, John Rose, Prof. Jonathan Rosenhead, Leon Rosselson, Michael Sackin, Ian Saville, Amanda Sebestyen, Sam Semoff, Prof. Ludi Simpson, Viv Stein, Inbar Tamari, Ruth Tenne, Norman Traub, Eve Turner, Tirza Waisel, Karl Walinets, Renee Walinets, Stanley Walinets, Philip Ward, Naomi Wimborne-Idrissi, Ruth Williams, Jay Woolrich, Ben Young, Myk Zeitlin, Androulla Zucker, John Zucker

Anonymous said...

The fascist scumbags bombed another UN compound I heard on the radio this morning.

I'm fast becoming a full-stop antisemite.....

Anonymous said...

Israeli forces bombed a cemetery in Gaza yesterday, sending body parts flying on to neighbouring houses

Anonymous said...

Rowan says, ...a few provocateurs to infiltrate anti-israel marches in holland and shout "jews to the gas".

That is a handy ruse.
A variation on the "Jewish person paints swastikas on the Synagogue" scam.
Organize a few rabble-rousers to shout anti-Jewish slogans, thereby putting the audience in mind that the protesters are the inheritors of the "Nazi" outlook, nothing but a bunch of murderous Jew haters.
And it is no doubt a very successful ruse.

The scams are meant, to reinforce the idea that Jews need a "homeland" (and an enormous, belligerent military force), that Jews are in danger in other parts of the world and so should move to Israel immediately, and to smear anybody who begs to differ.

The condition placed on the agreement to establish Israel in the Balfour Declaration seems, in its second part, to be talking about such attempts to push Jews into going to Israel.

"... It being clearly understood that nothing shall be done which may prejudice the civil and religious rights of
existing non-Jewish communities in Palestine, or the rights and political status enjoyed by Jews in any other country."

Note that this was written to Lord Rothschild for the information of his Zionist pals.
Now what would Rothschild and the Zionists have to do with prejudicing "...the rights and political status enjoyed by Jews in any other country.""?
My guess is... plenty.

The current murderous terrorist attack on Gaza will help to generate "anti-Jewish" sentiment where previously there was none.

Anonymous said...

Come to think of it, the Madoff affair will have a similar effect.

Anonymous said...

Balfour Declaration.

Foreign Office
November 2nd, 1917

Dear Lord Rothschild,

I have much pleasure in conveying to you, on
behalf of His Majesty's Government, the following
declaration of sympathy with Jewish Zionist aspiration(?)
which has been submitted to, and approved by, the Cabinet.

"His Majesty's government view with favour the
establishment in Palestine of a national home(?) for the
Jewish people, and will use their their best endeavours to
to facilitate the achievement of this object. It being
clearly understood that nothing shall be done which
may prejudice the civil and religious rights of
existing non-Jewish communities in Palestine, or the
rights and political status enjoyed by Jews in any
other country."

I should be grateful if you would bring this
declaration to the knowledge of the Zionist Federation.


Arthur James Balfour

Anonymous said...

the Balfour Declaration contradicted the letters of the covenant (referring to the League Covenant) the Anglo-French Declaration, and the instructions of the King-Crane Commission. All of the other engagements contained pledges that the Arab populations could establish national governments of their own choosing according to the principle of self-determination.

Balfour explained:

"The contradiction between the letters of the Covenant [of the League of Nations] and the policy of the Allies is even more flagrant in the case of the ‘independent nation’ of Palestine than in that of the ‘independent nation‘ of Syria. For in Palestine we do not propose to even go through the form of consulting the wishes of the present inhabitants of the country though the American Commission is going through the form of asking what they are.

The Four Great Powers [Britain, France, Italy and the United States] are committed to Zionism. And Zionism, be it right or wrong, good or bad, is rooted in age-long traditions, in present needs, and future hopes, of far profounder import than the desires and prejudices of the 700,000 Arabs who now inhabit that ancient land. In my opinion that is right.

What I have never been able to understand is how it can be harmonized with the [Anglo-French] declaration, the Covenant, or the instruction to the [King-Crane] Commission of Enquiry.

I do not think that Zionism will hurt the Arabs, but they will never say they want it. Whatever be the future of Palestine it is not now an ‘independent nation’, nor is it yet on the way to become one. Whatever deference should be paid to the views of those living there, the Powers in their selection of a mandatory do not propose, as I understand the matter, to consult them. In short, so far as Palestine is concerned, the Powers have made no statement of fact which is not admittedly wrong, and no declaration of policy which, at least in the letter, they have not always intended to violate.

If Zionism is to influence the Jewish problem throughout the world Palestine must be made available for the largest number of Jewish immigrants. It is therefore eminently desirable that it should obtain the command of the water-power which naturally belongs to it whether by extending its borders to the north, or by treaty with the mandatory of Syria, to whom the southward flowing waters of Hamon could not in any event be of much value.

For the same reason Palestine should be extended into the lands lying east of the Jordan. It should not, however, be allowed to include the Hedjaz Railway, which is too distinctly bound up with exclusively Arab Interests..."

Anonymous said...

It's pretty clear, with the date of 1917, that the Balfour declaration had nothing to do with the Holocaust, which had not happened yet. It is also clear that no reference was made to Tsarist pogroms (and it would not be long before the Communist revolution got rid of the last Tsar). Immigration of Russian Jews to the United States had been pretty free and open. But there were to be reactions against immigrants in the 1920's. I am not very much a student of this period of history, but it seems clear that as with the Versailles Treaty, those in power seemed bent upon exercising it without thinking out the consequences. No mention is made of the Christian Palestinians. There is just this statement about not caring about the fate of "700,000 Arabs". That would include the burnoose-wearing Sephardic Jews in the community as well -- no thought to their fate under this new regime.

To me, it looks like the imperial will in the waning days of empire, but my nose twitches and I smell oil at the beginning of the Age of Petroleum. What's this about not interfering with some Arabian railroad, huh? Co-investors in London, perhaps? Royal Saudi alliances? Follow the money. If you have it, they have to be nice to you. Thanks, London. You really set everyone up. But I guess that was to keep oil out of the hands of the German cousins, too. And the Russkies.

Anonymous said...

... nothing to do with the Holocaust, which had not happened yet.

that's right, it hasn't happened yet.