IMF managing director arrested, accused of sexual attack

[JackRiddler]

.

So not that the question is the best way to divine a truth of this case, but what is really more in "the spirit of RI"? To expect that a conspiracy destroyed DSK, or to expect that there are a lot of rapists in high places?

.

[Pazdispenser]

.

So not that the question is the best way to divine a truth of this case, but what is really more in "the spirit of RI"? To expect that a conspiracy destroyed DSK, or to expect that there a lot of rapists in high places?

.

Yes.

[JackRiddler]

.

Yes it's the Murdoch Post and their headline yesterday was something like "Frog Legs It," hwa-ha-ha dumb. However, if there's one thing those NYP fuckers have, it's sources friendly to them in the NYPD.

http://nymag.com/daily/intel/2011/05/dominique.html#

Post: Strauss-Kahn Hit On Several Women During His Stay in New York

5/22/11 at 12:30 PM 12Comments

Dominique Strauss-Kahn made advances on two Sofitel Hotel employees before he allegedly assaulted a maid, and then he hit on a flight attendant before getting arrested, according to the New York Post. The report comes via interviews with every Sofitel Hotel employee, conducted by investigators in the case. First, the 62-year-old allegedly asked the Sofitel's VIP receptionist, who escorted him to his suite Friday evening, to join him for a glass of Champagne after her shift, but she rejected him. On Saturday, Strauss-Kahn asked a hotel desk receptionist to share Dom Perignon with him in his room, but the woman declined. Later — after he allegedly "chased a maid down into his bedroom, grabbed her breasts, attempted to pull down her pantyhose, and forced her to perform fellatio before she tore free from his grasp" — the ex-IMF honcho had lunch with his daughter Camille, a Columbia student, before heading to JFK Airport. Finally, on the airplane, Strauss-Kahn allegedly barked, "Quel beau cul" — French for "nice ass" — at a flight attendant, moments before Port Authority detectives hauled him off the plane and took him into custody.

And in case you're wondering how the Post covered this news: Horrifyingly, the paper describes him as "a frisky Frenchman ... hungry for any piece of meat he could lay his hands on," who "resorted to violence." (Ack.) Meanwhile, Strauss-Kahn's wife, Anne Sinclair, was spotted this weekend leaving the New York apartment where the ex-IMF chief is under house arrest.

Strauss-Kahn made advances on two hotel staffers, flight attendant [NYP]
http://www.nypost.com/p/news/local/manh ... owC6ukinFM

[Joe Hillshoist]

That Brookings Institute speech was actually a debate with Sharan Burrow where Strauss-Kahn had to concede Burrows points wrt to employment.

Lets see how the IMF responds, and while we are there, lets not forget its policies that the IMF recommends that fail to address what Burrow raised that are driving the current unrest in Europe.

[lupercal]

link to a notarized transcript of the entire April 13 Brookings event, a panel discussion followed by questions from the audience:

http://www.brookings.edu/~/media/Files/ ... f_jobs.pdf

In the 61-page PDF transcript the word "debate" does not appear once in the prepared remarks of the moderator or panelists. It appears once each in two questions raised by unidentified audience members, and once in one of Burrow's answers. Honesty malfunction detected in post above.

[JackRiddler]

.

Saith Kanye West, "Let's have a toast for the douchebags..."


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Bm5iA4Zupek
(Sorry that this video has a required commercial to start.)

Let's have a toast for the first one to set this song to a new video showing images of the G20, the bankers, the billionaires, the generals, the warriors, the high priests, the dictators, the demagogues, and the corporate chiefs.

.

[AhabsOtherLeg]

^ ^
edit: Who is Parsifal? What is the Grail?

*

Whom does it serve?

The only conspiracy theory I ever thought might hold water in this whole Strauss-Kahn thing is nothing much to do with Sarkozy's next (seemingly doomed) run at the Presidency. The real question is who controls the IMF, and who wants to buy up Greek, Portuguese, Icelandic, and (possibly) Irish public services when they are forced by the IMF to austeritize and privatize them? Strauss-Kahn was retiring soon, so why would they take him down, if they intended to replace him with a less socialistic candidate? Maybe he had something to tell us. If he did, he should've told us before. It won;t matter now.

He's clearly not a socialist, though - he was head of the IMF!

[lupercal]

^ Yes but you forget that the IMF and for that matter, the World Bank were originally chartered by the UN in 1944 to help reduce world poverty by regulating currencies (IMF) and making development loans (World Bank). So they're not genetically evil organizations, although they've been run that way. More on the IMF and World Bank (which is four times larger than the IMF incidentally):

from "Factsheet - The IMF and the World Bank," http://www.imf.org/external/np/exr/facts/imfwb.htm :

The IMF’s mandate. The IMF promotes international monetary cooperation and provides policy advice and technical assistance to help countries build and maintain strong economies. The Fund also makes loans and helps countries design policy programs to solve balance of payments problems when sufficient financing on affordable terms cannot be obtained to meet net international payments. IMF loans are short and medium term and funded mainly by the pool of quota contributions that its members provide. IMF staff are primarily economists with wide experience in macroeconomic and financial policies.

The World Bank’s mandate. The World Bank promotes long-term economic development and poverty reduction by providing technical and financial support to help countries reform particular sectors or implement specific projects—for example, building schools and health centers, providing water and electricity, fighting disease, and protecting the environment. World Bank assistance is generally long term and is funded both by member country contributions and through bond issuance. World Bank staff are often specialists in particular issues, sectors, or techniques.

Also helpful: "The IMF and the World Bank: How Do They Differ?," by David D. Driscoll, http://www.imf.org/external/pubs/ft/exr ... differ.htm

[JackRiddler]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_xgxCf05Kmw

& You Must View This Lecture
http://rigorousintuition.ca/board2/view ... 00#p366222

Prior to the election in 2008, "recovering trade attorney" Lori Wallach lectured at Iowa State University and outlined what I will coin as the True World Order (The TWO!) of the IMF, WTO, World Bank, NAFTA and other globalization authorities. (No satanic magic required, just capitalism.) Since the crises of the 1970s the transnational corporations and financial capital have commandeered the offices of the powerful states led by the US to impose, through obscure and voluminous "trade agreements" mostly unrelated to trade, a neoliberal policy wish-list on almost all of the world's countries. The system intensifies labor exploitation and suppression, overturns national legal codes, accelerates and practically requires all the familiar economic and ecological disasters, and reduces nations to little more than servile bidders for capital. The point is not only to maximize profit but in effect to require states to guarantee and insure it. In just one hour Wallach reviews the history, structure of the system, global impacts, many typical cases of WTO and NAFTA rulings, and examples of successful resistance. (I was pleased to recall the protests that stopped MAI back in the 1990s.)

[COMPLETE TRANSCRIPT AT LINK]

SNIP

[lupercal]

^ mostly about the World Bank which was chartered to make development loans but I notice Pilger and his experts use the terms as if they were identical. They're related, but not identical, and just for the record, DSK ran the IMF, not the World Bank.

[Joe Hillshoist]

In the 61-page PDF transcript the word "debate" does not appear once in the prepared remarks of the moderator or panelists. It appears once each in two questions raised by unidentified audience members, and once in one of Burrow's answers. Honesty malfunction detected in post above.

Yet Burrow's organisation - the ITUC calls the debate a debate:

Parallel to these meetings, ITUC General Secretary Sharan Burrow took part in a debate in Washington with IMF Managing Director Dominique Strauss-Kahn on Wednesday to voice trade union views about the IFI's responsibility to adopt economic recovery programmes consistent with a more equitable and sustainable growth and development model.

Admittedly it wasn't much of a debate.

Perhaps you need to remove your honestly malfunction detecctor from your backside and give it a good clean.

[lupercal]

A panel discussion is not a debate, and the April 13 Brookings event was not a debate. End of story.

[Joe Hillshoist]

A panel discussion is not a debate, and the April 13 Brookings event was not a debate. End of story.

So both the ITUC and I are liars then?

[lupercal]

Actually the ITUC, on the ITUC website which you did not link to, correctly calls the April 13 Brookings event a "conference on employment":

"Address by Sharan Burrow to the Brookings Institution Conference on Employment - Washington, 13 April 2011"

http://www.ituc-csi.org/address-by-shar ... o-the.html

So I detect another honesty malfunction and I'm afraid that's all I have to say on this subject.

[Joe Hillshoist]

Yets here's my source:

INTERNATIONAL TRADE UNION CONFEDERATION

ITUC OnLine
084/140411

IMF’s Strauss-Kahn backs ITUC analysis on global threat of unemployment and inequality

....

Parallel to these meetings, ITUC General Secretary Sharan Burrow took part in a debate in Washington with IMF

....

For more information, please contact the ITUC Press Department on: 32
2 224 02 04 or 32 476 621 018

From the link above, and thats your justification for calling me a liar. Well based on your contributes re wikileaks, egypt and this so called "arab spring", popuolar uprising in Spain and this particular debate I guess that makes sense.

A panel discussion is not a debate, and the April 13 Brookings event was not a debate. End of story.

It appears my CIA mates at Google would beg to differ.

Are they liars too?