U.S. Rep. Lynn Westmoreland today voted against congressional Democrats cynical tax plan for AIG bonuses.
“House and Senate Democrats messed up big time and now they want to tinker with the tax code as part of a public relations stunt,” Westmoreland said after the vote. “I know Americans want to punish executives who are getting taxpayer dollars as bonuses – I know it because I’m just as outraged. But honest members of Congress have a duty to stand up against these shenanigans and explain to Americans that Democrats messed up and now they’re trying to sweep it under the rug.”
The legislation imposes a retroactive 90 percent tax for bonuses received since Jan. 1 by an employee of any company that has received more than $5 billion from federal bailouts. Language protecting these bonuses in the so-called stimulus package was written entirely by Democrats and signed by President Obama.
“I voted against the stimulus that allowed these bonuses and I voted against the TARP legislation that funded these bonuses,” Westmoreland said. “As I’ve said on the floor of the House, we don’t know what would have happened if Congress hadn’t passed TARP, but we do know that AIG’s employees wouldn’t be getting bonuses because they wouldn’t have jobs.
“I didn’t vote ‘no’ today because I support bonuses for AIG employees. I voted no because I can’t support using the tax code retroactively to punish a particular group or to score political points. I don’t want American taxpayers to get back 90 percent of the bonuses; I want them to get back 100 percent of the hundreds of billions they have doled out to corporations whose bad decisions have blown a gaping hole into the global economy.”
Watch Rep. Westmoreland’s video on the AIG vote: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Mbrk37ofKHM
---
http://www.fayettefrontpage.com/
Fayette Front Page
Community News You Can Use
Fayetteville, Peachtree City, Tyrone
http://www.georgiafrontpage.com/
http://www.artsacrossgeorgia.com/
---
Showing posts with label AIG. Show all posts
Showing posts with label AIG. Show all posts
Thursday, March 19, 2009
Boehner: The American People Deserve to Get 100 Percent of Their Money Back
Republican Leader John Boehner (R-OH) today delivered remarks on the House floor condemning taxpayer-funded bonuses for AIG executives and calling for passage of legislation that will allow American taxpayers to get 100 percent of their money back immediately. Full transcript of Boehner's remarks follow:
“Mr. Speaker, my colleagues, I caught a little grief five weeks ago when we had the stimulus bill on the floor. Remember the 1,100-page bill that no one had time to read and that no one did read? Obviously the President didn’t have time to read it either because in that bill was this one sentence. This one sentence that made it clear that someone knew that these AIG bonuses were about to be paid and they didn’t want them stopped. So somehow in the dark of night this one sentence was added to the bill so that AIG would pay these bonuses to their executives.
“This language wasn’t in the House bill. This language wasn’t in the Senate bill. This language showed up in the dead of night and no one got to see it. I’m wondering where did the language come from? Who wrote it? Who asked the conferees to put it in the bill? What conferees on the part of the House agreed to this? I’m looking for somebody to put their hand up.
“That’s the whole issue. This political circus that’s going on here today with this bill is not getting to the bottom of the questions of who knew what and when did they know it. Somebody was responsible to draw up this language. Someone brought it to the conferees. Someone brought it to the Democrat Leadership who wrote this bill in secret and put this language in there. But we have no idea who it was.
“Secondly, the bill before us tempts to recoup 90 percent of these bonuses. Why 90 percent? The American people are outraged. I’m outraged. And we just voted down an opportunity to bring a bill to the floor from our freshmen members that said, real simple, we ought to get 100 percent of this money back. We can get 100 percent back because the Treasury Secretary has the ability to get it all back. The Administration has the ability to get it all back. Why don’t we just get it all back? Why are we bringing this bill to the floor today to give members political cover when in fact the Treasury Secretary has the authority, the Administration has the authority to get all of it back? But, no, that got voted down. Our bill would have been a better bill.
“Thirdly, our colleagues, Mr. LaTourette and Mr. McCotter, have introduced a resolution of inquiry to get all of the documents surrounding communications between the Treasury, the Fed, and AIG to understand who was in the middle of this conversation? People have known about this for months and yet we just found out about it over the last 48 hours. And so we want this resolution of inquiry to be passed by the committee. We want to get to the bottom of all of this. But in the meantime do we have to have this political charade of bringing this bill out here? I don’t think so. I think this is a bad bill with bad consequences. We didn’t see the bill until last night. Nobody in the committee marked it up. Nobody debated it. And nobody understands the consequences of what we are about to do. How can we possibly vote yes on a bill like this? I yield back.”
-----
www.fayettefrontpage.com
Fayette Front Page
www.georgiafrontpage.com
Georgia Front Page
“Mr. Speaker, my colleagues, I caught a little grief five weeks ago when we had the stimulus bill on the floor. Remember the 1,100-page bill that no one had time to read and that no one did read? Obviously the President didn’t have time to read it either because in that bill was this one sentence. This one sentence that made it clear that someone knew that these AIG bonuses were about to be paid and they didn’t want them stopped. So somehow in the dark of night this one sentence was added to the bill so that AIG would pay these bonuses to their executives.
“This language wasn’t in the House bill. This language wasn’t in the Senate bill. This language showed up in the dead of night and no one got to see it. I’m wondering where did the language come from? Who wrote it? Who asked the conferees to put it in the bill? What conferees on the part of the House agreed to this? I’m looking for somebody to put their hand up.
“That’s the whole issue. This political circus that’s going on here today with this bill is not getting to the bottom of the questions of who knew what and when did they know it. Somebody was responsible to draw up this language. Someone brought it to the conferees. Someone brought it to the Democrat Leadership who wrote this bill in secret and put this language in there. But we have no idea who it was.
“Secondly, the bill before us tempts to recoup 90 percent of these bonuses. Why 90 percent? The American people are outraged. I’m outraged. And we just voted down an opportunity to bring a bill to the floor from our freshmen members that said, real simple, we ought to get 100 percent of this money back. We can get 100 percent back because the Treasury Secretary has the ability to get it all back. The Administration has the ability to get it all back. Why don’t we just get it all back? Why are we bringing this bill to the floor today to give members political cover when in fact the Treasury Secretary has the authority, the Administration has the authority to get all of it back? But, no, that got voted down. Our bill would have been a better bill.
“Thirdly, our colleagues, Mr. LaTourette and Mr. McCotter, have introduced a resolution of inquiry to get all of the documents surrounding communications between the Treasury, the Fed, and AIG to understand who was in the middle of this conversation? People have known about this for months and yet we just found out about it over the last 48 hours. And so we want this resolution of inquiry to be passed by the committee. We want to get to the bottom of all of this. But in the meantime do we have to have this political charade of bringing this bill out here? I don’t think so. I think this is a bad bill with bad consequences. We didn’t see the bill until last night. Nobody in the committee marked it up. Nobody debated it. And nobody understands the consequences of what we are about to do. How can we possibly vote yes on a bill like this? I yield back.”
-----
www.fayettefrontpage.com
Fayette Front Page
www.georgiafrontpage.com
Georgia Front Page
Wednesday, March 18, 2009
Pelosi Statement on AIG Legislation on House Floor Tomorrow
/PRNewswire-USNewswire/ -- Speaker Nancy Pelosi issued the following statement tonight on legislation the House will vote on tomorrow to hold companies, including American International Group (AIG), accountable for the bonuses that were paid to their executives. The legislation will recover the bulk of these bonuses by taxing them at a rate of 90 percent. Below the Speaker's statement is a brief fact sheet on HR 1586.
"We must stabilize the financial system in order to strengthen our economy and create jobs. We must also protect the American taxpayer from executives who would use their companies' second chances as opportunities for private gain.
"Because they could not use sound judgment in the use of taxpayer funds, these AIG executives will pay the Treasury in the form of this tax. I urge all my colleagues to vote in favor of this legislation and in favor of recovering taxpayer dollars and protecting Americans from the continued poor judgment of some of America's largest companies."
* * * * * *
As a result of extraordinary abuses of the public trust by companies rewarding employees with excessive compensation while receiving billions in taxpayer assistance, Congress introduced legislation to recover taxpayers' dollars.
The bill would apply a separate income tax rate of 90 percent to bonuses received by individuals from companies which have received at least $5 billion from TARP. It would also apply to bonuses paid by Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac.
For this purpose, bonuses will be defined as any retention payment, incentive payment, or other bonus which is in addition to regular employee compensation payable on a periodic basis.
The special tax rate only would apply to individuals and families with overall income (including income other than bonuses) in excess of $250,000.
The bill applies to payments received after December 31, 2008.
-----
www.fayettefrontpage.com
Fayette Front Page
Community News You Can Use
Fayetteville, Peachtree City, Tyrone
www.georgiafrontpage.com
Georgia Front Page
"We must stabilize the financial system in order to strengthen our economy and create jobs. We must also protect the American taxpayer from executives who would use their companies' second chances as opportunities for private gain.
"Because they could not use sound judgment in the use of taxpayer funds, these AIG executives will pay the Treasury in the form of this tax. I urge all my colleagues to vote in favor of this legislation and in favor of recovering taxpayer dollars and protecting Americans from the continued poor judgment of some of America's largest companies."
* * * * * *
As a result of extraordinary abuses of the public trust by companies rewarding employees with excessive compensation while receiving billions in taxpayer assistance, Congress introduced legislation to recover taxpayers' dollars.
The bill would apply a separate income tax rate of 90 percent to bonuses received by individuals from companies which have received at least $5 billion from TARP. It would also apply to bonuses paid by Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac.
For this purpose, bonuses will be defined as any retention payment, incentive payment, or other bonus which is in addition to regular employee compensation payable on a periodic basis.
The special tax rate only would apply to individuals and families with overall income (including income other than bonuses) in excess of $250,000.
The bill applies to payments received after December 31, 2008.
-----
www.fayettefrontpage.com
Fayette Front Page
Community News You Can Use
Fayetteville, Peachtree City, Tyrone
www.georgiafrontpage.com
Georgia Front Page
Tuesday, December 16, 2008
Federal Lawsuit Filed Against Treasury Secretary to Stop AIG Bailout Financing of Terrorist Activities
/PRNewswire-USNewswire/ -- A federal lawsuit was filed December 15 against U.S. Treasury Secretary Henry M. Paulson, Jr. and the Federal Reserve Board to stop all bailout funds from going to American International Group, Inc. ("AIG"). According to the lawsuit, the U.S. government, through its ownership of AIG, is not only violating the Constitution, but also promoting and financing the destruction of America using American tax dollars.
The basis of the lawsuit is that AIG intentionally promotes Shariah-compliant businesses and insurance products, which by necessity must comply with the 1200 year old body of Islamic cannon law based on the Quran, which demands the conversion, subjugation, or destruction of the infidel West, including the United States. To help achieve these objectives and with the aid of federal tax dollars, AIG employs a three-person Shariah Advisory Board, with members from Saudi Arabia, Bahrain, and Pakistan. According to AIG, the role of its Shariah authority "is to review [its] operations, supervise its development of Islamic products, and determine Shariah compliance of these products and [its] investments."
Of particular significance is the Pakistani Board member, Dr. Muhammed Imran Ashraf Usmani. Dr. Usmani is the son and devoted disciple of Sheik Mufti Taqi Usmani, the leading authority on Shariah financing who, in 1999, authored a book dedicating an entire chapter on why a Western Muslim must engage in violent jihad against his own country - even if Muslims are given equality and freedom to practice their religion and to proselytize.
The lawsuit was filed in the Federal District Court for the Eastern District of Michigan on behalf of Kevin J. Murray, a former Marine infantryman who served two tours of duty in Iraq. Murray is represented by the Thomas More Law Center, a national public interest law firm based in Ann Arbor, Michigan, and David Yerushalmi, an associated attorney who specializes in litigation and is an expert on Shariah law (http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=1105101) and Shariah compliant financing. Mr. Yerushalmi also serves as general counsel to the Center for Security Policy in Washington, D.C.
According to the lawsuit, use of taxpayer funds to acquire ownership of a business that intentionally promotes, endorses, supports, and funds Shariah-based Islamic religious practices violates the Establishment Clause of the First Amendment to the U.S. Constitution.
Richard Thompson, President and Chief Counsel of the Thomas More Law Center, commented, "This lawsuit not only raises significant constitutional issues, it also shines a light on serious national security issues that our own government has created by direct financial support and ownership of a business that supports anti-American, radical Islamic activities. Make no mistake, there is an internal cultural jihad underway against our great nation, and I fear that many of our political leaders are unwittingly complicit in it."
On September 11, 2001, Islamic terrorists, guided by principles of Shariah-mandated jihad against "infidels," attacked and killed thousands of innocent American civilians. Shortly thereafter, the U.S. went on the offensive by engaging Islamic terrorists overseas in Iraq and in Afghanistan. As in the past when our Nation faced great crisis, American servicemen were called to action, and Kevin Murray answered the call. From March to October 2003, Murray - a U.S. Marine - was deployed overseas in support of Operation Enduring Freedom and Operation Iraqi Freedom.
Yet today, Murray's federal tax dollars are being used to advance the very cause of global jihad he and his fellow servicemen were placed in harm's way to overcome. Shariah explicitly demands the murder of infidels like Kevin Murray and the destruction of the United States, which Murray took an oath to defend. Shariah is the same law that is used to justify beheadings, stonings, and amputation for petty crimes in places like Saudi Arabia, Iran, and Sudan, which Americans deplore.
Nevertheless, AIG acknowledges and boasts its promotion of Shariah law and Shariah-based business practices. AIG itself describes "Sharia" as "Islamic law based on the Quran and the teachings of the Prophet [Mohammed]."
In further support of the federal government's endorsement of Shariah, the U.S. Treasury department co-sponsored a seminar in November of this year entitled "Islamic Financing 101" (http://www.thomasmore.org/downloads/sb_thomasmore/-AnnouncementonIslamicFinan ce.pdf) to promote Shariah financing among American institutions. The Seminar was jointly sponsored by Harvard University, one of the many American universities and colleges receiving millions of dollars from oil-producing countries to influence their Middle East programs, which are often staffed with professors who are anti-American, anti-Israeli, and pro-Islamic.
"It is clear," said Thompson, "oil money is purchasing the sovereignty of the United States and whatever loyalty to America these greedy financial institutions, corporations, and universities have left. It's up to the American people to take back their country from those who so easily betray its interests."
The federal lawsuit challenges that portion of the "Emergency Economic Stabilization Act of 2008" that appropriated $40 billion in taxpayer money to fund and financially support the United States government's majority ownership interest in AIG, which engages in Shariah-based Islamic religious activities that are anti-Christian, anti-Jewish, and anti-American.
According to the lawsuit, through the use of taxpayer funds, the U.S. government acquired a majority (79.9%) ownership interest in AIG, and as part of the bailout, Congress appropriated and expended an additional $40 billion of taxpayer money to fund and financially support AIG and its financial activities. AIG, which is now a government owned company, engages in Shariah-compliant financing, which subjects certain financial activities, including investments, to the dictates of Islamic law and the Islamic religion. This specifically includes any profits or interest obtained through such financial activities.
An important element of Shariah-compliant financing is a form of obligatory charitable contribution called zakat, which is a religious tax for assisting those that "struggle [jihad] for Allah." The amount of this tax is between 2.5% and 20%, depending upon the source of the wealth. The zakat religious tax is used to financially support Islamic "charities," some of which have ties to terrorist organizations that are hostile to the United States and all other "infidels," which includes Christians and Jews.
The Holy Land Foundation for Relief and Development, recently convicted for providing material support to Islamic terrorist organizations, is an example of an Islamic "charity" that qualifies for receipt of the zakat. Thus, as a direct consequence of the taxpayer funds appropriated and expended to purchase and financially support AIG, the U.S. government is now the owner of a corporation engaged in the business of collecting religious taxes to fund interests adverse to the United States, Christians, Jews, and all other "infidels" under Islamic law
Continued Thompson, "This lawsuit is as much about protecting constitutional principles as it is about protecting our national security and preventing another 9/11 - whether it be overt through flying planes into buildings or covert through appropriating taxpayer money to fund an Islamic cultural jihad."
The lawsuit seeks a court order to stop the taxpayer funding of AIG and its Islamic-based businesses and activities.
The Thomas More Law Center has been involved in several cases dealing with the insidious threat of radical Islam. Law Center attorney Robert Muise, who is handling this case involving AIG, is also one of the Law Center's attorneys defending LtCol Jeffrey Chessani, USMC, the senior officer charged in the so-called "Haditha Massacre" case. Those charges were dismissed by a military judge, and the government has appealed that ruling. Muise is also representing former Marine Jesse Nieto, whose anti-Islamic terrorism message was recently banned by military authorities at Marine Corps Base Camp Lejeune because of some unknown complaints.
The Thomas More Law Center defends and promotes America's Christian heritage and moral values, including the religious freedom of Christians, time-honored family values, and the sanctity of human life. It supports a strong national defense and an independent and sovereign United States of America. The Law Center accomplishes its mission through litigation, education, and related activities. It does not charge for its services. The Law Center is supported by contributions from individuals, corporations and foundations, and is recognized by the IRS as a section 501(c)(3) organization. You may reach the Thomas More Law Center at (734) 827-2001 or visit our website at www.thomasmore.org.
-----
www.fayettefrontpage.com
Fayette Front Page
www.georgiafrontpage.com
Georgia Front Page
The basis of the lawsuit is that AIG intentionally promotes Shariah-compliant businesses and insurance products, which by necessity must comply with the 1200 year old body of Islamic cannon law based on the Quran, which demands the conversion, subjugation, or destruction of the infidel West, including the United States. To help achieve these objectives and with the aid of federal tax dollars, AIG employs a three-person Shariah Advisory Board, with members from Saudi Arabia, Bahrain, and Pakistan. According to AIG, the role of its Shariah authority "is to review [its] operations, supervise its development of Islamic products, and determine Shariah compliance of these products and [its] investments."
Of particular significance is the Pakistani Board member, Dr. Muhammed Imran Ashraf Usmani. Dr. Usmani is the son and devoted disciple of Sheik Mufti Taqi Usmani, the leading authority on Shariah financing who, in 1999, authored a book dedicating an entire chapter on why a Western Muslim must engage in violent jihad against his own country - even if Muslims are given equality and freedom to practice their religion and to proselytize.
The lawsuit was filed in the Federal District Court for the Eastern District of Michigan on behalf of Kevin J. Murray, a former Marine infantryman who served two tours of duty in Iraq. Murray is represented by the Thomas More Law Center, a national public interest law firm based in Ann Arbor, Michigan, and David Yerushalmi, an associated attorney who specializes in litigation and is an expert on Shariah law (http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=1105101) and Shariah compliant financing. Mr. Yerushalmi also serves as general counsel to the Center for Security Policy in Washington, D.C.
According to the lawsuit, use of taxpayer funds to acquire ownership of a business that intentionally promotes, endorses, supports, and funds Shariah-based Islamic religious practices violates the Establishment Clause of the First Amendment to the U.S. Constitution.
Richard Thompson, President and Chief Counsel of the Thomas More Law Center, commented, "This lawsuit not only raises significant constitutional issues, it also shines a light on serious national security issues that our own government has created by direct financial support and ownership of a business that supports anti-American, radical Islamic activities. Make no mistake, there is an internal cultural jihad underway against our great nation, and I fear that many of our political leaders are unwittingly complicit in it."
On September 11, 2001, Islamic terrorists, guided by principles of Shariah-mandated jihad against "infidels," attacked and killed thousands of innocent American civilians. Shortly thereafter, the U.S. went on the offensive by engaging Islamic terrorists overseas in Iraq and in Afghanistan. As in the past when our Nation faced great crisis, American servicemen were called to action, and Kevin Murray answered the call. From March to October 2003, Murray - a U.S. Marine - was deployed overseas in support of Operation Enduring Freedom and Operation Iraqi Freedom.
Yet today, Murray's federal tax dollars are being used to advance the very cause of global jihad he and his fellow servicemen were placed in harm's way to overcome. Shariah explicitly demands the murder of infidels like Kevin Murray and the destruction of the United States, which Murray took an oath to defend. Shariah is the same law that is used to justify beheadings, stonings, and amputation for petty crimes in places like Saudi Arabia, Iran, and Sudan, which Americans deplore.
Nevertheless, AIG acknowledges and boasts its promotion of Shariah law and Shariah-based business practices. AIG itself describes "Sharia" as "Islamic law based on the Quran and the teachings of the Prophet [Mohammed]."
In further support of the federal government's endorsement of Shariah, the U.S. Treasury department co-sponsored a seminar in November of this year entitled "Islamic Financing 101" (http://www.thomasmore.org/downloads/sb_thomasmore/-AnnouncementonIslamicFinan ce.pdf) to promote Shariah financing among American institutions. The Seminar was jointly sponsored by Harvard University, one of the many American universities and colleges receiving millions of dollars from oil-producing countries to influence their Middle East programs, which are often staffed with professors who are anti-American, anti-Israeli, and pro-Islamic.
"It is clear," said Thompson, "oil money is purchasing the sovereignty of the United States and whatever loyalty to America these greedy financial institutions, corporations, and universities have left. It's up to the American people to take back their country from those who so easily betray its interests."
The federal lawsuit challenges that portion of the "Emergency Economic Stabilization Act of 2008" that appropriated $40 billion in taxpayer money to fund and financially support the United States government's majority ownership interest in AIG, which engages in Shariah-based Islamic religious activities that are anti-Christian, anti-Jewish, and anti-American.
According to the lawsuit, through the use of taxpayer funds, the U.S. government acquired a majority (79.9%) ownership interest in AIG, and as part of the bailout, Congress appropriated and expended an additional $40 billion of taxpayer money to fund and financially support AIG and its financial activities. AIG, which is now a government owned company, engages in Shariah-compliant financing, which subjects certain financial activities, including investments, to the dictates of Islamic law and the Islamic religion. This specifically includes any profits or interest obtained through such financial activities.
An important element of Shariah-compliant financing is a form of obligatory charitable contribution called zakat, which is a religious tax for assisting those that "struggle [jihad] for Allah." The amount of this tax is between 2.5% and 20%, depending upon the source of the wealth. The zakat religious tax is used to financially support Islamic "charities," some of which have ties to terrorist organizations that are hostile to the United States and all other "infidels," which includes Christians and Jews.
The Holy Land Foundation for Relief and Development, recently convicted for providing material support to Islamic terrorist organizations, is an example of an Islamic "charity" that qualifies for receipt of the zakat. Thus, as a direct consequence of the taxpayer funds appropriated and expended to purchase and financially support AIG, the U.S. government is now the owner of a corporation engaged in the business of collecting religious taxes to fund interests adverse to the United States, Christians, Jews, and all other "infidels" under Islamic law
Continued Thompson, "This lawsuit is as much about protecting constitutional principles as it is about protecting our national security and preventing another 9/11 - whether it be overt through flying planes into buildings or covert through appropriating taxpayer money to fund an Islamic cultural jihad."
The lawsuit seeks a court order to stop the taxpayer funding of AIG and its Islamic-based businesses and activities.
The Thomas More Law Center has been involved in several cases dealing with the insidious threat of radical Islam. Law Center attorney Robert Muise, who is handling this case involving AIG, is also one of the Law Center's attorneys defending LtCol Jeffrey Chessani, USMC, the senior officer charged in the so-called "Haditha Massacre" case. Those charges were dismissed by a military judge, and the government has appealed that ruling. Muise is also representing former Marine Jesse Nieto, whose anti-Islamic terrorism message was recently banned by military authorities at Marine Corps Base Camp Lejeune because of some unknown complaints.
The Thomas More Law Center defends and promotes America's Christian heritage and moral values, including the religious freedom of Christians, time-honored family values, and the sanctity of human life. It supports a strong national defense and an independent and sovereign United States of America. The Law Center accomplishes its mission through litigation, education, and related activities. It does not charge for its services. The Law Center is supported by contributions from individuals, corporations and foundations, and is recognized by the IRS as a section 501(c)(3) organization. You may reach the Thomas More Law Center at (734) 827-2001 or visit our website at www.thomasmore.org.
-----
www.fayettefrontpage.com
Fayette Front Page
www.georgiafrontpage.com
Georgia Front Page
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)