LF: I RECANT.

In one way or another, we are all victims of our past. I was schooled in certain persuasions that have taken 3/4 of a lifetime to overcome. But when I made a conscious decision to pursue and follow truth--no matter where it led me--many years ago, my mind and heart have been liberated with the illumination of truth time and time again. I personally believe that only people who, in their hearts, are sincerely open to truth will ever find it.

I will not make these issues a test of fellowship with those who disagree with me (although, I'm sure many of them will). I, myself, believed differently for all of my adult life. And these conclusions have not been made overnight. It has taken years of study and research to bring me to the conclusions I am sharing with you in this post.

Obviously, this forum will not allow me to go into detail about the conclusions I'm going to share. That must be reserved for another day and another forum. But, for the sake of the folks--especially those Christian folks--who follow my work, I believe I need to be honest and straightforward regarding these conclusions.

That doesn't mean that I DON'T believe in a Rapture. It just means that I am no longer dogmatic about it; and neither do I think that it matters to a tinker's dam regarding my personal duty to God. The Lord is going to fulfill His divine will regarding prophetic events in His time. Quite frankly, I am convinced that, for the most part, it is not for us to know the things God has reserved unto Himself. (Acts 1:6, 7)

For too long, many of our pre-millennial friends have been using a belief in the Rapture as an excuse to sit back on their blessed assurance and do nothing. Even if the doctrine is true, the way it is being used as an excuse to not engage the liberty fight is downright shameful.

2. I recant the position that the modern state of Israel is the same as the prophetic Israel of the Bible.

The nation of Israel rejected their Messiah and God destroyed their nation, their capital city, and their temple in 70 AD. Spiritually, the children of Israel have been in a state of blindness ever since. With the advent of the New Testament Church, we are NOT Jews or Gentiles, Greeks or Barbarians, etc.: we are all ONE IN CHRIST. God's people today are the blood-washed saints of all races, ethnicities, nationalities, etc. Again, we are ONE IN CHRIST.

Accordingly, I am convinced that the modern state of Israel is NOT the prophetic fulfillment of the future redeemed nation of Israel. NOT IN ANY SHAPE, MANNER, OR FORM. I further conclude that the misapplication of applying prophetic scriptures to the modern state of Israel is producing nothing but perpetual war, the demise of liberty at home, the rise of a Police State, and the facilitation of a devilish New World Order.

I voted for him when Ron Paul endorsed him in '08, and I just might again in '16.

I think he might have discussed his reasons in a little more depth if he wanted to persuade more readers to his position. This is more a mere statement than an argument.

Turns out he was right. "TARP revenue has totaled $441.7 billion on $426.4 billion invested."

Da comrade. The government should nationalize the entire financial sector because when it comes to TOO BIG TO FAIL, big government has the monopoly. /s

That's not necessary if the federal government would keep it's nose out of the financial sector to begin with.

But when the federal government forces banks -- under the rubric of diversity and inclusiveness -- to offer sub-prime loans to otherwise unqualified buyers, I think they share the responsibility when the bank fails.

Had the federal government not intruded itself, the banks would have been just fine.

"FRAUD - You probably think there should be rules against it, I think the market will figure it out" --Alan Greenspan to Brooksley Born

The problem is not derivatives. The problem is what the derivative is derived from.

When the derivative is sub-prime mortgage-backed securities and the sub- prime mortgage is a worthless piece of paper (due to federal government interference), the derivative is worthless.

Keep in mind that it was a government institution, Fannie Mae, that rated these mortgage backed securities and said they were solid. They lied.

Housing never goes down, right? That's the essence of what he said - and what he admitted he was wrong about.

The gaming of housing prices and the gaming of the derivatives market cannot be separated, they are sewage in the same systemically corrupt sewer pipe.

The same is true about congress and the vermin who've corrupted it to facilitate their kleptocracy.

Are you saying Glass-Steagall was responsible for the banking crisis? If not, give it a f**king rest already.

Are you saying the deregulation advocated by Greenspan didn't allow banks to engage in activities that resulted in the big 4 PRESENTLY holding over 200 Trillion dollars in notional derivatives?

If not, then give yourself a f**king rest and try doing some actual research into the events that created the environment in which the so-called "banking" crisis transpired instead of regurgitating Lush Limbaugh's GeeOpie sound bytes.

OK. So you're saying that Glass-Steagall was NOT responsible for the banking crisis but you're going to keep bringing it up anyways.

Just like you're going to keep bringing up your stupid Ameriquest argument despite the FACT that they only represented a very small part of the problem.

Just like you're going to keep bringing up your stupid "whiteout and scissors" argument like that was the main problem.

Take your red herrings elsewhere. The government interfered with the financial market. It was only fair that they cleaned up their own mess. That they did so at a profit was simply a bonus.

Nope. Removing the prohibitions of Glass-Steagall absolutely was part of the problem.

I'm saying go educate yourself about the systemic sewer system's plumbing before talking out of your a$$.

Country Wide, Wells Fargo, Bear Stearns, and the other predators who followed the "revolutionary" model pioneered by Roland Arnall and his merry band of Long Beach pirates evidently didn't think it was so stupid.

Well hell, I'll concede Ameriquest was "part" of the problem as well as "whiteout and scissors" were "part" of the problem.

You are so desperate in your search for a boogeyman. What percentage of the subprime loans did "Godfather" Ameriquest make? Do you know? How about 10%?

>>Oh, now it's "part" of the problem?

It was always part of the problem shyte for brains.

>>What percentage of the subprime loans did "Godfather" Ameriquest make?

What percentage of subprime loans were made by those who followed the securitization model the Godfather's fraudulent enterprise invented?

starting with the emergence of subprime mortgage lending in Southern California in the 1980’s. Roland Arnall was there at the beginning, at the helm of a small federal savings bank, and Hudson’s main narrative traces how Arnall’s lending operations grew into the nation’s biggest subprime lending empire. At their peak in 2004, Ameriquest and its affiliates generated $83 billion in subprime loans—and $1.3 billion in profits. The bulk of the profits flowed through to Arnall, elevating him to #73 on the Forbes Four Hundred list of the richest Americans. He took the money and ran, becoming U.S. Ambassador to the Netherlands in early 2006.
...
still, the explosive growth of subprime lenders like Ameriquest was only possible because of the big Wall Street firms that purchased their loans and packaged them into securities sold to investors. Wall Street’s quest for the generous fees gained in this process led them to be no more interested in borrowers” ability to repay their loans than were the lenders. So Hudson’s second focus is on Lehman Brothers, the biggest Wall Street backer of subprime lenders, and the picture there was no prettier than it was at Ameriquest. A Lehman executive who visited the now-infamous First American Mortgage Company (FAMCO) in the 1990s reported back that “there is something really unethical about the type of business in which FAMCO is engaged. ... [I]t is a requirement to leave your ethics at the door.” Nevertheless, Lehman eagerly sought to finance the company’s operations and buy its loans.
etc. etc.
http://dollarsandsense.org/archives/2011/0511campen.html

>>Glass-Steagall was repealed 10 years before the banking crisis.

Long enough to inflate the bubble.

Ameriquest founder was subprime "godfather"