Huge article in New York Times by Floyd Norris

xxdiamondchildxx
DIAMOND JEDI
GOOD READ IMO! Re: Patrick Byrne exposes F. Norris
« Thread Started Yesterday at 11:49pm »

My Fellow CMKXers,

Please read "the blurb" below from a post written by Patrick Byrne on January 26th of 2008 (link provided) as it pertains to New York Times reporter Floyd Norris (Re: an SEC case)...sounds familiar, right. It is my opinion that Floyd Norris IS AN SEC SYMPATHIZER/SUPPORTER and is merely a pawn/puppet to "The System/The Powers That Be". It is clear to me that his "anti-CMKX/anti-Attorney Hodges' suit against SEC Members" article is either an extension of the sentiments of those of "ill intent" or part of an agreed upon "master plan" to downgrade/discredit TO THE PUBLIC what is really going on as it pertains to CMKX. Either way, Floyd Norris has been utilized in what it appears is his typical puppet role. He also appears to know HOW TO TIME the release of his articles...so to speak.

www.deepcapture.com/wall-street-captures-the-sec/

"On December 5, 2006, however, New York Times reporter Floyd Norris wrote a story that was dismissive of Mr. Aguirre’s allegations and derisive towards his motives (“Get a Job, then Sue Because You Were Not Hired Earlier”). Reporter Norris included no quote from Mr. Aguirre and precisely one sentence (“He contends that the S.E.C. was unwilling to go after John Mack, now the chief executive of Morgan Stanley, because of his political clout”) that reflected Aguirre’s position. Norris made no mention of Aguirre’s deeper claims about the capture of the SEC by “Powerful interests [which] want the SEC to stay just the way it is or, better yet, to become even weaker,” nor about its failure “to recognize any hedge fund fraud or manipulation against other market participants for a quarter century,” nor about the systemic risk thereby engendered (we will see that such omissions occur with remarkable consistency in our mainstream financial press).

However, Norris did find space to give liberal coverage to the SEC’s position , including an SEC statement denying Aguirre’s claims, the SEC’s reasons for that denial, the position of SEC Enforcement Director Linda Thomsen reaffirming the SEC’s position, the same from an EEOC judge, two rhetorical questions aimed at deriding Mr. Aguirre’s actions, and a quote from an SEC lawyer attacking Aguirre. Mr. Norris closed by saying of that attack by the SEC’s own lawyer, “It certainly sounds as if that opinion was (sic) correct.”

Such was the impartial approach taken by “our newspaper of record.”

This mocking and derisive piece appeared on The New York Times on the day that Gary Aguirre testified at a US Senate hearing. The U.S. Senate Judiciary Committee took Mr. Aguirre’s testimony (see parts 1 and 2). Several SEC officials appeared to refute Mr. Aguirre’s claims (click here). Giving testimony that drew sharp replies from the U.S. Senate Judiciary Committee members, these SEC officials contradicted each other and their own email records. The Inspector General of the SEC refused to answer questions on the advice, he said, of the U.S. Department of Justice.

Read that again: our capital markets are regulated by the SEC, and the Inspector General of the SEC, in effect, its “Internal Affairs” department, invoked the 5th Amendment’s protection against self-incrimination."

====================================

I cannot say this enough...GOD BLESS THOSE WITH "RIGHTEOUS" INTENT!!!!!!!!!!

Peter
(Dxild)