IMF chief Dominique Strauss-Kahn expected to be charged with sex attack

anart said:
go2 said:
I know its hard to believe a powerful man could be a criminal, but we don't need to look for a set up to explain a criminal complaint.

I don't think any regular reader of this forum would ever think it's hard to believe that a powerful man could be a criminal. I'm actually surprised to see you write that. I think the question that has been asked is why wasn't it swept under the rug as all other crimes powerful men commit are swept under the rug. He certainly isn't the only rapist in a high position of power and at that level they protect their own.

My guess is he either made someone else very powerful very angry, or he's outlived his usefulness. Or, even more likely, it's a very strong message sent due to some action he was going to take. I saw a picture today of him on a bench in the courtroom with his arms crossed across his chest, his legs crossed at the ankle, as he was glancing up at a corrections officer - his expression was not the expression of a man who is afraid of jail. It was an expression of a man who is very annoyed at being treated like a 'normal' and knows it will end soon.

With that said, I should add that I do think it's certainly possible he just got caught this time - but, as always, we'll see how things proceed.

Well, maybe its not obvious, but I am speaking satirically with the first part of the quoted sentence in response to wide spread disbelief that DSK got caught by a fast acting victim and a few honest cops, before the crime could be covered up. This can happen with offices closed for the weekend. I will try to be more clear in the future.
 
go2 said:
Well, maybe its not obvious, but I am speaking satirically with the first part of the quoted sentence in response to wide spread disbelief that DSK got caught by a fast acting victim and a few honest cops, before the crime could be covered up. This can happen with offices closed for the weekend. I will try to be more clear in the future.

Apologies - I completely missed the satire.
 
go2 said:
I know its hard to believe a powerful man could be a criminal,

I'd like to know how a man could be considered "powerful" by modern societal standards without being a criminal? That's be quite a trick.
 
Here is Benjamin Fulford's take on it. I am not sure how seriously to take Fulford, but he certainly has interesting things to say.

Weekly Geopolitical News and Analysis20110516: The arrest of IMF chief Dominique Strauss-Kahn signals new phase in financial war



Dominique Strauss-Kahn, the head of the IMF, was arrested last week because he was trying to steal the American people’s Social Security money to finance the Euro, according to Rothschild family sources. The charge of rape against him was almost certainly a case of entrapment by a female agent although I am sure no proof of this will ever be found. The next phase in the battle against the high level financial gangsters is expected to target Goldman Sachs and Morgan Stanley but, the closing of these criminal enterprises will only mark an intermediate phase in the battle against the criminal elements concentrated in the central banks of the West, according to White Dragon Society sources. The end result is certain to be a historical change of the sort not seen for thousands of years, if ever.
 
go2, this time there are no apologists for DSK, that's what makes the subject suspicious. For Roman Polanski, there were apologists. But this time the politicians and media are behaving in a curious way, knowing that they receive their orders from the intelligence agencies (at least in France).

Psychopaths, especially in positions of power, have always a way out. Remember that they can blame it on the victim, invent a terrorist plot or anything. Thant's the bizarre thing in this case, why don't they do it for their servant DSK, the head of the IMF, the destroyer of nations? One cannot belong to the hierarchy without some skulls in its laundry. These are known facts foreveryone who followed politics on local or global scale a little. A man cannot be powerful in their STS system without being a criminal.

The question is not wheather or no he committed the crime. That is clearly the case. The question is, why the PTB did not deploy the usual smoke and screen operation to protect or hide their pawn?

If you read mu post again, you'll see that you misunderstood it, maybe because of the word "scandal" that i use as the mediatic exposition of a crime, and not as a lessening of the crime as you seem to have understood :)

Edit: space between sentences for more clarity
 
Guardian said:
I'd like to know how a man could be considered "powerful" by modern societal standards without being a criminal? That's be quite a trick.
Yes, and these people, before giving some power or some responsibility to someone, they have to be sure they have something to blackmail and threaten him. He must be a criminal before being entrusted by criminals.
 
Guardian said:
go2 said:
I know its hard to believe a powerful man could be a criminal,

I'd like to know how a man could be considered "powerful" by modern societal standards without being a criminal? That's be quite a trick.

That's for sure, a salient requirement to be President of the United States is the capacity to order mass murder. The President of the International Monetary Fund has to be proficient at financially raping whole countries, so I guess a raping a hotel maid must not even seem like a crime to Dominique Strauss-Kahn. It is infuriating to watch him portrayed as a victim in many of today's reports.

I live in Oregon and a previous Oregon governor, Neil Goldschmidt raped a thirteen year old girl repeatedly over a three year period and escaped prosecution, as many leaders of the Portland community covered up his crime by blaming the victim for seducing their fine mayor. His rabbi publicly lamented the dark seductiveness of the child who derailed the promising career of such a fine man.

I see the same disbelief today that Dominique Strauss-Kahn could be a rapist and I agree with Guardian that exploitation is the aim of most political and economic institutions and we shouldn't be surprised that those who manage these institutions have the same motive of power over others, including rape.

mkrnhr said:
go2, this time there are no apologists for DSK, that's what makes the subject suspicious. For Roman Polanski, there were apologists. But this time the politicians and media are behaving in a curious way, knowing that they receive their orders from the intelligence agencies (at least in France).

Psychopaths, especially in positions of power, have always a way out. Remember that they can blame it on the victim, invent a terrorist plot or anything. Thant's the bizarre thing in this case, why don't they do it for their servant DSK, the head of the IMF, the destroyer of nations? One cannot belong to the hierarchy without some skulls in its laundry. These are known facts foreveryone who followed politics on local or global scale a little. A man cannot be powerful in their STS system without being a criminal.

The question is not wheather or no he committed the crime. That is clearly the case. The question is, why the PTB did not deploy the usual smoke and screen operation to protect or hide their pawn?

If you read mu post again, you'll see that you misunderstood it, maybe because of the word "scandal" that i use as the mediatic exposition of a crime, and not as a lessening of the crime as you seem to have understood :)

Edit: space between sentences for more clarity

OK--you repeated the allegation that this crime came to light as a result of political dirty tricks. The Le Pen story or that DSK was a threat to financial interests make him appear to be the victim of forces or agents unknown. These stories are apology for DSK, detracting from focus on the victim of a brutal crime by alleging that the perpetrator is himself the victim of larger interests. It is possible the rape victim is an agent of powers wishing to destroy DSK, but it is early to give credibility to such allegations.

Perhaps, I understood what you wrote, not what you intended. Using the word scandal to describe the crime of rape is inaccurate. Why use the titillating word scandal, rather than the more accurate words crime or rape?

Edit: I checked the definition of scandal and mkrnhr's usage is accurate. Rape scandal is commonly used, perhaps to lesson the impact of the crime.
 
DSK being arrested at JFK airport might have a symbolic meaning, including a warning, a reminder and even one of those dirty mindtricks the PTB like to play.
 
mkrnhr said:
The question is not wheather or no he committed the crime. That is clearly the case. The question is, why the PTB did not deploy the usual smoke and screen operation to protect or hide their pawn?

I think DSK was introducing too much balance in favor of Europe and not using the IMF enough as a tool of destruction.
 
Like many others stated in this thread we have to wait and see the real reasons behind the scenes. But i think, like always, there must be more than one reason to victimize their puppets . It seems to me that the ongoing currency war and his role in this is the strongest reason.

Guardian said:
go2 said:
I know its hard to believe a powerful man could be a criminal,

I'd like to know how a man could be considered "powerful" by modern societal standards without being a criminal? That's be quite a trick.

Here is the real trick; IMF itself is the real criminal, maybe they're even more criminal than invading conventional armies.
 
Article on CNN that uses the term "antisocial" in connection with Dominique Strauss-Kahn:

"Regardless of the facts of the latest infamous case -- the accusations of sexual assault leveled at former International Monetary Fund chief Dominique Strauss-Kahn -- the fact is that every so often, we are surprised that a mature (in years, at least) male does an antisocial sexual act."

_http://edition.cnn.com/2011/OPINION/05/19/schwartz.sexual.assault/index.html?hpt=Sbin
 
It's funny how the leader of the IMF is arrested in the midst of banker jungle in New York. A guy with that much clout should certainly be able to get away with anything and everything in these surroundings. Looks like the war of the psychos to me. The fact that DSK was challenging the dominance of the dollar (as was reported in Feb. 2011 http://www.sott.net/articles/show/223628-IMF-boss-calls-for-global-currency) makes a compelling case for who his enemies could be. His being treated as a common criminal rather than a highly connected financier also seems very strange.

DSK is also the front runner to challenge the current French president in the upcoming elections which also doesn't seem to endear him to many political circles there. Another strange coincidence is that the hotel where he was staying is owned by Accor, a huge multinational French conglomerate.

A man running from the law normally doesn't have a leisurely lunch with his daughter a few blocks from the scene of the crime. Of course, this could just be typical of a man who sees himself as above the law.

This article makes a compelling argument for what could be happening behind the scenes:

_http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/article28135.htm

Dominique Strauss-Kahn Was Tying to Torpedo the Dollar

By Mike Whitney

May 19, 2011

---- -It's all about perception management. The media is trying to dig up as much dirt as they can on Dominique Strauss-Kahn so they can hang the man before he ever sees the inside of a courthouse. It reminds me of the Terry Schiavo case, where devoted-husband Michael was pegged as an insensitive slimeball for carrying out the explicit wishes of his brain-dead wife. Do you remember how the media conducted their disgraceful 24 hour-a-day Blitzkrieg with the endless coverage of weepy Christian fanatics on the front lawn of the hospital while Hannity, Limbaugh and O' Reilly fired away with their sanctimonious claptrap?

And now you're telling me that that same media is just "doing their job?"

Give me a break.

Whoever wants to nail IMF chief Dominique Strauss-Kahn has really pulled out all the stops. Their agents have been rummaging through diaries, hotel registries, phone records, yearbooks, yada, yada, yada. The UK Telegraph even paid a visit to a high-priced DC knocking shop to get a little dirt from Madame Botox; whatever it takes to make a randy banker look like the South Hill rapist. And they're doing a pretty good job, too. The cops have made sure that the "Great Seducer" always appears handcuffed and dressed in a "pervie" raincoat with 3-days stubble before they parade him in front of the media. On Wednesday--more grist for the mill--they released his mug-shot, an unflattering, deadpan photo that makes him look like Jack-the-Ripper. Was that the intention?

And, that's not the half of it. The Big Money is exhuming every woman he's ever had contact with for the last 30 years hoping they can glean some damning tidbit of information that will convince the doubters that beneath that sophisticated manner and $25,000 suit lurks a closet Bluebeard ready to snap up your daughters and defile your wives. Next thing you know, they'll be trotting out Paula Jones and Tanya Harding claiming they spent a torrid night with the Marquis de Kahn in a trailerpark outside Winamucca.

Where does it stop? Or does it stop? Are we in for another year-long Clinton-Lewinski feeding frenzy where everyday we hear more lurid details about the sexploits of people who don't really interest us at all?

Aren't you at all curious about who's behind this "lynching by media" scam? This is an all-out, no-holds-barred, steel-cage, take-down. The big boys save that kind of action for the worst offenders, that is, for the insiders who have broken "Omerta" or wandered off the reservation. I mean, they locked him up on Riker's Island without bail, for Chrissake. What does that tell you? Even Bernie Madoff was allowed to stay in his $7 million Park Avenue penthouse while he waited for trial, but not Straus-Kahn. Oh, no. He get's the royal treatment, even though he has no criminal record and nothing but the sketchy accusations of a chambermaid against him, he's carted off to the state slammer where he can mingle with hardened criminals while dining on corn flakes and Wonder Bread.

You call that justice?

Can I tell you what this is all about? It's about the dollar. That's right. Strauss-Kahn was mounting an attack against the dollar and now the wrath of the Empire has descended on him like ton-of-bricks. Here's the scoop from the UK Telegraph:

"Dominique Strauss-Kahn, managing director of the International Monetary Fund, has called for a new world currency that would challenge the dominance of the dollar and protect against future financial instability.....

He suggested adding emerging market countries' currencies, such as the yuan, to a basket of currencies that the IMF administers could add stability to the global system....Strauss-Kahn saw a greater role for the IMF's Special Drawing Rights, (SDRs) which is currently composed of the dollar, sterling, euro and yen, over time but said it will take a great deal of international cooperation to make that work." ("International Monetary Fund director Dominique Strauss-Kahn calls for new world currency", UK Telegraph)

So, Strauss-Kahn finds himself in the same crowd as Saddam Hussein and Libyan leader Muammar Gaddafi, right? You may recall that
Saddam switched from dollars to euros about a year before the war. 12 months later Iraq was invaded, Saddam was hanged, and the dollar was restored to power. Gaddafi made a similar mistake when "he initiated a movement to refuse the dollar and the euro, and called on Arab and African nations to use a new currency instead, the gold dinar." ("Libya: All About Oil, or All About Central Banking?" Ellen Brown, Op-Ed News) Libya has since come under attack by US and NATO forces which have armed a motley group of dissidents, malcontents and terrorists to depose Gaddafi and reimpose dollar hegemony.

And now it's Strauss-Kahn's turn to get torn to shreds. And for good reason. After all, DSK actually poses a much greater threat to the dollar than either Saddam or Gaddafi because he's in the perfect position to shape policy and to persuade foreign heads of state that replacing the dollar is in their best interests. And that is precisely what he was doing; badmouthing the buck. Only he was too dense to figure out that the dollar is the US Mafia's mealticket, the main way that shifty banksters and corporate scalawags extort tribute from the poorest people on earth. Strauss-Kahn was rocking the boat, and now he's going to pay.

Here's a clip from CNN Money:

"The International Monetary Fund issued a report Thursday on a possible replacement for the dollar as the world's reserve currency.

The IMF said Special Drawing Rights, or SDRs, could help stabilize the global financial system....SDRs represent potential claims on the currencies of IMF members.....The IMF typically lends countries funds denominated in SDRs. While they are not a tangible currency, some economists argue that SDRs could be used as a less volatile alternative to the U.S. dollar.

"Over time, there may also be a role for the SDR to contribute to a more stable international monetary system," he said.

The goal is to have a reserve asset for central banks that better reflects the global economy since the dollar is vulnerable to swings in the domestic economy and changes in U.S. policy.

In addition to serving as a reserve currency, the IMF also proposed creating SDR-denominated bonds, which could reduce central banks' dependence on U.S. Treasuries. The Fund also suggested that certain assets, such as oil and gold, which are traded in U.S. dollars, could be priced using SDRs." ("IMF discusses dollar alternative", CNN Money)

Wow. So DSK was zeroing in on US Treasuries as well as the dollar? That's the whole shooting match.

So, what type of progress was he making in converting USDs to SDRs? According to Reuters: "The IMF general resources credit outstanding increased to 65.5 billion Special Drawing Rights, or SDRs, ($104 billion) on May 12 from 6.0 billion SDRs at December 2007. The so-called new arrangement to borrow, which came into effect on April 1, increased the IMF's available lending resources to 269 billion SDRs on May 12 from 120 billion SDRs on March 31." (http://in.reuters.com/article/2011/05/17/idINIndia-57083920110517?type=economicNews)

Not a bad start for such an ambitious project. It looks like DSK's dream of dethroning the dollar as the de facto "international currency" was beginning to gain momentum. (Nobel prize winning economist Joseph Stiglitz has said that the transition from dollars to SDRs "could be phased in within the next year.") But didn't he know that his actions would anger some very powerful and well-connected people?

Well, if he did; he never let on. In fact, he started mucking around in other stuff, too, like when he intervened on behalf of Irish taxpayers, trying to protect them at the expense of foreign bondholders. That's a big "No no" in banker's world. They keep a list of "people who count", and taxpayers are not on that list. Here's an excerpt from the Irish Times:

"Ireland’s Last Stand began less shambolically than you might expect. The IMF, which believes that lenders should pay for their stupidity before it has to reach into its pocket, presented the Irish with a plan to haircut €30 billion of unguaranteed bonds by two-thirds on average. (Irish finance minister) Lenihan was overjoyed, according to a source who was there, telling the IMF team: “You are Ireland’s salvation.”

The deal was torpedoed from an unexpected direction. At a conference call with the G7 finance ministers, the haircut was vetoed by US Treasury Secretary Timothy Geithner who, as his payment of $13 billion from government-owned AIG to Goldman Sachs showed, believes that bankers take priority over taxpayers. The only one to speak up for the Irish was UK chancellor George Osborne, but Geithner, as always, got his way. An instructive, if painful, lesson in the extent of US soft power, and in who our friends really are.

The negotiations went downhill from there. On one side was the European Central Bank, unabashedly representing Ireland’s creditors and insisting on full repayment of bank bonds. On the other was the IMF, arguing that Irish taxpayers would be doing well to balance their government’s books, let alone repay the losses of private banks." ("Ireland's future depends on breaking free from bailout", Morgan Kelly, Irish Times)

So, Strauss-Kahn stuck up for Irish taxpayers over the banks, the bondholders, the ECB, and the US Treasury. Naturally, that made him persona non grata among the ruling throng.

And, there's more, too, because Strauss-Kahn's vision was not limited to currency alone, but involved broad structural changes to the IMF itself that would have reversed decades of neoliberal policies. DSK had settled on a new approach to policymaking; one that would abandon the worst elements of globalization and put greater emphasis on social cohesion, cooperation and multilateralism. Here's an excerpt from the speech titled "Human Development and Wealth Distribution" he gave in November 2010:

"....Adam Smith—one of the founders of modern economics—recognized clearly that a poor distribution of wealth could undermine the free market system, noting that: “The disposition to admire, and almost to worship, the rich and the powerful and…neglect persons of poor and mean condition…is the great and most universal cause of the corruption of our moral sentiments.”

This was over 250 years ago. In today’s world, these problems are magnified under the lens of globalization....globalization also had a dark side. Lurking behind it was a large and growing chasm between rich and poor—especially within countries. An inequitable distribution of wealth can wear down the social fabric. More unequal countries have worse social indicators, a poorer human development record, and higher degrees of economic insecurity and anxiety. In too many countries, inequality increased and real wages stagnated—failing to keep up with productivity—over the past few decades. Ominously, inequality in the United States was back at its pre-Great Depression levels on the eve of the crisis....

An immediate task is to end the scourge of unemployment....Progressive taxation can also promote equity through redistribution, and this should be encouraged....“Inequality is corrosive” ....“it rots societies from within…it illustrates and exacerbates the loss of social cohesion…the pathology of the age and the greatest threat to the health of any democracy.” ("Human Development and Wealth Distribution", Dominique Strauss-Kahn, IMF)

Can you believe it? DSK is lecturing bankers about redistribution? That's not what they want to hear. What they want to hear is why ripping off poor people actually makes the world a better place. DSK's speech just shows that he wasn't drinking the Koolaid anymore. He was becoming a nuisance and they needed to get rid of him.

Does that mean he didn't rape the woman who was in his hotel room?

Of course not. He could be guilty. But he deserves a fair trial, and someone's making damn sure he doesn't get one.
 
http://www.sott.net/articles/show/230954-Strauss-Kahn-s-Accuser-was-a-Maid-Cleaning-Up-as-a-Hooker-

It is seeming more and more likely that the PTB wanted this guy out. My guess is that he was too much of a threat to Sarkozy.

I don't know too much about his successor, Christine Lagarde. But I'm sure there was something to gain for people like Sarkozy for putting her in power.
 
Deedlet said:
http://www.sott.net/articles/show/230954-Strauss-Kahn-s-Accuser-was-a-Maid-Cleaning-Up-as-a-Hooker-

It is seeming more and more likely that the PTB wanted this guy out. My guess is that he was too much of a threat to Sarkozy.

I don't know too much about his successor, Christine Lagarde. But I'm sure there was something to gain for people like Sarkozy for putting her in power.

My take on it is that DSK was not doing enough at the head of the IMF : destroying countries in general and Greece in particular.

Around the time he got arrested there were discussions within the IMF about negociating a reduction of Greece loan payments with the banks (i.e. not fully destroying the country).

Then he got arrested and an austerity plan for Greece was designed by the IMF and the banks. A few days ago, the Greek assembly voted (by a tiny majority) for this austerity plan.

Meanwhile Christine Lagarde was elected at the head of the IMF. She seems to be a more malleable puppet than DSK and her political records in France and abroad speak volume. For example she co-presided with Zbigniew Brzezinski a work group - within Dick Cheney's Center for International & Strategic Studies - that oversaw the privatization (destruction) of Poland. That sounds like a nice rehearsal before Greece and certainly other European countries like Spain or Portugal.

Today Greece destruction is on its way and DSK has been replaced by a servile puppet at the head of the IMF.

Now, is DSK going to use his martyr status wrongly accused by a evil maid and persecuted by the "Great Satan" to gain sympathy and access France presidence?
 
Now that DSK is out of the IMF, they can trash the maid (who was very likely a victim of this perv') by fabricating new "evidence" against her (wouldn't be too difficult for pple like DSK, whose lawyer is married to an assistant of the NY attorney), and present DSK as the new martyr (similar to the Baudis-Alègre affair in France, where a French politician was involved in sex scandals and murders, to suddenly be found innocent and the "victim" of "filthy rumors"). This sudden "new development" stinks to high heaven: a "hooker" involved in criminal activities and having 100 000$ on her account - but cleaning up toilets in a hotel for 3 years and living alone with her daughter in the Bronx?? And, how convenient, they have pics of her drinking and partying, despite being presented as a practicing Muslim (shades of Mohammed Atta anyone?). After the alleged "set up", lo and behold, she phoned her "accomplice" (knowing that the phone conversations were monitored) saying something like "hey buddy, do we continue with the setup?" Come on. There are even talks in France about DSK entering again the presidential race. What a coincidence.
 
Back
Top Bottom