13.07.2013 Views

Danny Schechter - ColdType

Danny Schechter - ColdType

Danny Schechter - ColdType

SHOW MORE
SHOW LESS

Create successful ePaper yourself

Turn your PDF publications into a flip-book with our unique Google optimized e-Paper software.

137<br />

www.huffingtonpost.com/ellen-brown/economic-9-11-didlehman_b_278202.html:<br />

According to Representative Paul Kanjorski, speaking on<br />

C-SPAN in January 2009, the collapse of Lehman Brothers<br />

precipitated a $550 billion run on the money market funds on<br />

Thursday, September 18. This was the dire news that Treasury<br />

Secretary Henry Paulson presented to Congress behind<br />

closed doors, prompting Congressional approval of Paulson’s<br />

$700 billion bank bailout despite deep misgivings. It was the<br />

sort of “shock therapy” discussed by Naomi Klein in her book<br />

The Shock Doctrine, in which a major crisis prompts hasty<br />

emergency action involving the relinquishment of rights or<br />

funds that would otherwise be difficult to pry loose from the<br />

citizenry.<br />

Like the “bombing” of Lehman stock on September 11, the<br />

$550 billion money market run was suspicious. The stock<br />

market had plunged when Lehman filed for bankruptcy on<br />

September 15, but it actually went up on September 16. Why<br />

did the money market wait until September 18 to collapse? A<br />

report by the Joint Economic Committee pointed to the fact<br />

that the $62 billion Reserve Primary Fund had “broken the<br />

buck” (fallen below a stable $1 per share) due to its Lehman<br />

investments; but that had occurred on September 15, and<br />

the fund had suspended redemptions for the following week.<br />

What dire reversal happened on September 17? According<br />

to the SEC, it was another record day for illegal naked short<br />

selling. Failed trades climbed to 49.7 million -- 23% of Lehman<br />

trades.<br />

This is another financial crisis mystery suggesting that most<br />

media accounts missed what else was going on. The Independent<br />

of London reported that the reasons for the Washington’s<br />

decision not to step in is still not clear, “It’s unconscionable<br />

what they did – or more accurately what they didn’t do,” says<br />

Joseph Stiglitz, Nobel prize-winning economist and professor<br />

at Columbia University.

Hooray! Your file is uploaded and ready to be published.

Saved successfully!

Ooh no, something went wrong!