From: "Linda Minor" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> I don't pretend to know how to figure out this mess. But I do have a small idea about how the political system works. It is operated by networks under a masonic structure--all the way from the brain trust down to the lowly ditch digger. The name of the game is jobs. That's why people don't speak out against the little things they see in their work that they feel instinctively are wrong; they have a family to support. Because the system is entrenched in this way, it is thoroughly pervasive within the government. The men who did understand how the system got started tried to put a structure of protection into the legal framework to prevent this type of looting to take place. But the brain trust is always there devising ways around it. In order to fight the end result, we have to understand how laws are written and interpreted--on a piecemeal basis. Courts do not look at an overview or a theory. They must isolate the facts to one situation and determine whether that scenario conforms to the statute creating it. They analyze the enabling legislation for the governmental entity--such as the Port Authority--and all court cases interpreting that or similar statutes. In my opinion, all legislation involving port authorities--whether in New York, Boston, Baltimore, New Orleans, Houston, etc.--is very political. Historically, that was the first bastion of the drug cartels--before railroads, airplanes, and any other form of transportation. The international trade in commodities, slaves and drugs knew they had to control the ports. They used profits to bribe officials to appoint their people to the boards of the authorities that controlled them. They then were able to control the bond issues and the revenue stream. The only way to defeat this system is for more people to learn how these financing schemes work. The politicians want money to finance campaigns. The people with the money are there to create money for the politician as long as they are given the control over these types of governmental authorities. If you read Pete Brewton's book, you can see how he connected Ned Holmes, chairman of the Houston Port Authority, to the county judge, Jon Lindsay, who made sure Holmes got the appointment. Then Holmes chaired Lindsay's reelection committee every year. Brewton also tied Holmes into a secret investment group, that I have attempted to follow up on. It leads to the P&O shipping company. If you look at Dope, Inc., you can follow P&O back to Jardine, Matheson, the original bond company for opium. Linda Minor >>However, any governmental agency that was a profit center (the Port Authority for New Jersey, the New Jersey Turnpike, and investment accounts, etc.) that generated no-tax revenue was "restricted by statute from being reported in the Annual Budget. Why? Because the state legislature passed laws to prevent reporting the income from profit center on the Budget. Instead, income from these profit centers was disclosed only on the CAFR. But that disclosure was not immediately apparent. For example, when Mr. Burien looked for New Jersey’s 1989 "gross cash receipts" in the CAFR, he found the figure buried on page 174, under the "Waste Water Treatment Trust Fund." It showed the amount of the total cash receipts for 1989 from all 69 autonomous state agencies and departments was almost $87 billion. In other words, New Jersey was charging $87 billion to provide $17 billion in public services. New Jersey citizens were paying $5 for every $1 in services they received, and the state was pocketing the other $4 as "profit." The CAFR also reported the state owned $32 billion in common stocks - but this figure was footnoted. The footnote revealed that the stocks were valued according to their original purchase price, not the current market value. In other words, if the state bought a stock in 1968 at $1.25 a share and it’s worth $3,000 a share now, they still report it on the CAFR as worth $1.25 a share. Burien determined that the true market value for the "$32 billion" in stocks reported on the New Jersey CAFR was actually about $70 billion.<< -----Original Message----- From: Brian Downing Quig <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Date: Saturday, February 19, 2000 8:42 AM Subject: [CIA-DRUGS] Burien's blueprint for Mr. Putin >From: Brian Downing Quig <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > >We are watching in real time the destruction of a system >that was foundationed on the assumption that common people >would never be able to communicate well enough to figure >this out. > >Brian Quig > >Bob wrote: > >> a sample: >> >> "CAFR reports indicate that the composite totals for all >> government (Federal, state, county and city) ownership >> of publicly traded stocks exceeds $32 TRILLION (53% >> of the total ownership of all listed stocks), $8 TRILLION >> in insurance company equity (should we be surprised by >> high priced mandatory auto insurance or unaffordable >> health >> care?) and $5 TRILLION in Bond Surety Escrow Accounts >> for future liability of existing or potential debt. >> >> Governments use Bond Surety Escrow Accounts to >> evade >> that pesky little rule that government should not operate >> at a >> "profit." That is, government should not impose more >> taxes >> than it actually uses to run the government. By >> designating tax >> revenue that exceeds operating costs as "Bond Surety >> Escrow" >> for future liability, government avoids calling excess >> revenue >> a "profit" and is thereby enabled to continue to enrich >> itself at >> public expense. >> >> To illustrate the potential for abusing "future >> liability >> payments," consider the New Jersey plan in the 1950s to >> build the New Jersey State Turnpike and Garden State >> Parkway Authorities. The state asked voters to approve >> a $7.5 billion bond to construct the turnpikes. The >> state >> explained that these turnpikes would be operated as toll >> roads by the bondholders until the $7.5 billion bond was >> paid off - but the bondholders could not operate the toll >> roads at a profit. Once the bonds were repaid, the >> turnpikes >> would revert back into the state’s Annual Budget as a >> normal >> cost/revenue item. The public voted Yes. >> >> Over the following years, the state sometimes >> alleged that >> the toll revenue from operating those turnpikes failed to >> cover >> their operating expenses, and so additional bonds were >> passed >> to fund the turnpikes. As a result, in 1990, the total >> bond >> liability still owed for the turnpike had grown to $14.5 >> billion. >> But guess how much was in the ‘Bond Surety Escrow >> Accounts’? >> $38 Billion! Enough to repay the original $7.5 billion >> bonds >> almost four times! >> >> How could that happen? Say the toll road made a >> $400 >> million profit for the year and the scheduled payment on >> the >> $7.5 billion bond was $100 million. The state made the >> $100 million payment but kept the extra $300 million in a >> Bond Surety Escrow Account for ‘future liability >> payments.’ >> Although they kept the $300 million, they did not declare >> it as >> an asset but wrote it off as a line item payment. In >> other years, >> even though they made a profit, they’d allege that they >> lost money >> and therefore floated more billions in bonds. (Guess who >> pays?) >> >> The bottom line is that New Jersey is collecting >> hundreds >> of billions of virtually unreported dollars from all the >> autonomous >> agencies. The motivating factor is not public welfare, >> but control >> of those billions. >> >> Brian Downing Quig wrote: >> >>> From: Brian Downing Quig <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >>> >>> Walter Burien has a new web site discussing the biggest >>> scam >>> of all. Could even be bigger than the energy scam. Now >>> >>> these same people would not deal drugs would they? >>> >>> >>> Brian >>> http://209.207.224.161/docs/welcome/burien.html >>> --------------------------------------------------------- >>> [ONElist Sponsor] >>> Please click above to support our sponsor >>> --------------------------------------------------------- >>> [ Home ] [ Site Map ] [ TTSF ] [ Contract ] [ Individual ] [ Ragnar Redbeard ] > > > [Image] > > > [Image] > > Comprehensive Annual Financial Reports (CAFRs) > > Report on CAFR Research by Walter J. Burien, Jr. > > Introduction > > Walter Burien Jr. worked as a Wall Street commodity trader for fifteen years, > but now resides in Arizona. According to Mr. Burien, every state, county and > major metropolitan city is keeping two sets of books. One set (the ‘Budget’) is > commonly available and tracks each governmental entity’s casts and tax > revenue. The Budget is the financial record that’s seen by the public and > used by politicians to justify new governmental services and higher taxes. > > However, there is a second set of books (called the Comprehensive Annual > Financial Report, or CAFR) which is virtually unknown to the public but > contains the real record of total governmental income. According to Mr. > Burien, although the Budget gives an accurate account of government costs, only > the CAFR gives an accurate account ot government’s income. > > For example, while a particular state budget might report receiving $20 billion > in taxes (just barely enough to sustain its $20 billion in costs) - the CAFR > might reveal the state’s real income is in the neighborhood of $60 billion - > three times as much as reported on the budget. If these allegations are > accurate, the particular state could stop charging all the taxes we are > familiar with and, not only survive but, either double the amount of reported > government services or give every citizen a huge tax rebate. > > The implications are mind-boggling. The CAFR's reveal that the world is so > different from what we are led to believe, so much more corrupt than suspected, > that we are left with three choices, either; 1) government agrees to end the > deception and stop overtaxing us, or 2) the American people agree to accept > their status as slaves, or 3) both sides refuse to agree and precipitate a > shooting revolution. The issue is that big. > > Are Mr. Burien’s allegations correct? How could any governmental entity dare to > routinely overcharge its citizens by 200%, underreport its income by 2/3rds, > and knowingly press for higher taxes based on an inaccurate budget? Worse, how > could such a fraudulent system become widespread among all states, counties, > cities and the Federal Government? > > Those who have made efforts to verify Burien's research indicate that the > conclusions drawn by Burien are probably correct. For instance: The State of > Alaska and the city of Anchorage both use Budget/CAFR accounting systems that > conceal a ‘breathtaking’ difference in reported revenue. Another researcher in > Wyoming claims that a comparison of his state’s budget and CAFR also support > Mr. Burien’s arguments. In every case, there are two sets of books and the > income reported on the budget is millions or billions of dollars less than is > reported on the CAFR. > > These verifications of Burien's research and findings lend credence to his > allegations. > > What follows is an amalgam of statements or implications raised by Mr. Burien > in various interviews. > > Mr. Burien reports first discovering the CAFR report in New Jersey in 1989, > when he helped start a New Jersey tax protest group called "Hands Across New > Jersey." While involved with that group, Mr. Burien read in the state ’s > Annual Budget that the total cost of all public services was $17 billion and > the "net available" (the money on hand to pay all bills) was $24.6 billion. But > then he asked the first question the IRS asks in any audit: "What are the gross > receipts?" He added the figures from various sources and came up with about > $44 billion and began to wonder how the state could have $17 billion in costs, > $24.6 billion in cash on hand, and $44 billion annual income? The numbers > didn’t add up, so he began to dig deeper. > > Because his father had been Personnel Manager for the State Treasury for eight > years, Mr. Burien understood how to get around in the various government > departments. The state Director of the Budget was on vacation, so Mr. Burien > called one of his lowest level assistants and said, "I’m working on a report > for Richard [the vacationing Budget Director] and I need all the figures on the > autonomous agency accounts, interest accounts, investment accounts." The > assistant said, "Ohh, you want the CAFR." This was the first time Burien had > heard of CAFR but he said, "Yes" and the assistant mailed it to him. > > The CAFR showed that New Jersey had liquid investment funds (cash) of $188 > billion; common stocks worth $70 billion, $10 billion in loans due from public > and private corporations, and $14 billion in insurance company equity > participation. The little state of New Jersey, which admitted to less than > $25 billion in annual income on its budget, reported $300 billion in cash, > stocks, loans and equity participation on its CAFR. According to Mr. Burien, > "On that day, I learned the definition of syndicated organized crime." > > The scam worked something like this: Anything that was a cost or expense for > public services (the traditional side of the Annual Service Budget, such as the > Department of Transportation, health and welfare, etc.) was reported on the > Budget where public taxes paid 100% of the bill for those services. That was > $17 billion. > > However, any governmental agency that was a profit center (the Port Authority > for New Jersey, the New Jersey Turnpike, and investment accounts, etc.) that > generated no-tax revenue was "restricted by statute from being reported in the > Annual Budget. Why? Because the state legislature passed laws to prevent > reporting the income from profit center on the Budget. Instead, income from > these profit centers was disclosed only on the CAFR. > > But that disclosure was not immediately apparent. For example, when Mr. > Burien looked for New Jersey’s 1989 "gross cash receipts" in the CAFR, he found > the figure buried on page 174, under the "Waste Water Treatment Trust Fund." > It showed the amount of the total cash receipts for 1989 from all 69 autonomous > state agencies and departments was almost $87 billion. In other words, New > Jersey was charging $87 billion to provide $17 billion in public services. > New Jersey citizens were paying $5 for every $1 in services they received, and > the state was pocketing the other $4 as "profit." > > The CAFR also reported the state owned $32 billion in common stocks - but this > figure was footnoted. The footnote revealed that the stocks were valued > according to their original purchase price, not the current market value. In > other words, if the state bought a stock in 1968 at $1.25 a share and it’s > worth $3,000 a share now, they still report it on the CAFR as worth $1.25 a > share. Burien determined that the true market value for the "$32 billion" in > stocks reported on the New Jersey CAFR was actually about $70 billion. > > But Mr. Burien goes further - he claims that the dual system of books is not > unique to New Jersey, but also common among all fifty states. Moreover, he > claims the dual accounting system was not only used ten years ago, but is still > being used today. > > For example, "In 1987 Arizona’s annual service budget reported $2.8 billion in > revenues but the state’s 1987 CAFR reported total cash receipts of $3.1 > billion, a mere $300 million difference." > > "However, in 1997, Arizona reported an Annual Service Budget of $5.5 billion > while the State’s CAFR (printed by the Auditor General’s Office) showed total > gross cash receipts of $17 billion. That’s a difference of over $11 > billion. In just ten years, Arizona had caught up to New Jersey in that both > states’ annual budgets reported less than one-third of the actual gross income > seen in the states’ CAFRs. > > "CAFR reports indicate that the composite totals for all government (Federal, > state, county and city) ownership of publicly traded stocks exceeds $32 > TRILLION (53% of the total ownership of all listed stocks), $8 TRILLION in > insurance company equity (should we be surprised by high priced mandatory auto > insurance or unaffordable health care?) and $5 TRILLION in Bond Surety Escrow > Accounts for future liability of existing or potential debt. > > Governments use Bond Surety Escrow Accounts to evade that pesky little rule > that government should not operate at a "profit." That is, government should > not impose more taxes than it actually uses to run the government. By > designating tax revenue that exceeds operating costs as "Bond Surety Escrow" > for future liability, government avoids calling excess revenue a "profit" and > is thereby enabled to continue to enrich itself at public expense. > > To illustrate the potential for abusing "future liability payments," consider > the New Jersey plan in the 1950s to build the New Jersey State Turnpike and > Garden State Parkway Authorities. The state asked voters to approve a $7.5 > billion bond to construct the turnpikes. The state explained that these > turnpikes would be operated as toll roads by the bondholders until the $7.5 > billion bond was paid off - but the bondholders could not operate the toll > roads at a profit. Once the bonds were repaid, the turnpikes would revert > back into the state’s Annual Budget as a normal cost/revenue item. The public > voted Yes. > > Over the following years, the state sometimes alleged that the toll revenue > from operating those turnpikes failed to cover their operating expenses, and so > additional bonds were passed to fund the turnpikes. As a result, in 1990, the > total bond liability still owed for the turnpike had grown to $14.5 billion. > But guess how much was in the ‘Bond Surety Escrow Accounts’? $38 Billion! > Enough to repay the original $7.5 billion bonds almost four times! > > How could that happen? Say the toll road made a $400 million profit for the > year and the scheduled payment on the $7.5 billion bond was $100 million. The > state made the $100 million payment but kept the extra $300 million in a Bond > Surety Escrow Account for ‘future liability payments.’ Although they kept > the $300 million, they did not declare it as an asset but wrote it off as a > line item payment. In other years, even though they made a profit, they’d > allege that they lost money and therefore floated more billions in bonds. > (Guess who pays?) > > The bottom line is that New Jersey is collecting hundreds of billions of > virtually unreported dollars from all the autonomous agencies. The motivating > factor is not public welfare, but control of those billions. > > Mr. Burien not only alleges that the dual accounting system exemplified by CAFR > is not only used by all fifty states, but also by all counties, cities and the > Federal Government itself. If Mr. Burien’s allegations are correct, they > comprise the most damning indictment of big government yet seen. In sum, Mr. > Burien implies that our government is in fact a criminal enterprise bent on > oppressing Americans by extorting several times as much tax revenue as it > spends on public services and using the majority of those extorted revenues to > enrich, empower and enlarge government at public expense. > > According to Mr. Burien, although the public is absolutely ignorant concerning > CAFR, the primary cause for that ignorance is not the politicians but the > mainstream media. When Mr. Burien first discovered the CAFR reports in New > Jersey in 1989, he went on radio 101.5 FM in a live 45 minute interview. Two > days later, that radio station was threatened with losing its license and was > almost shut down. CAFR had become another example of - "third rail > journalism" - any reporter or media outlet that touched the issue would be > silenced or driven from journalism. As a result, there’s been a total > mainstream media blackout on disclosing CAFR reports. > > Mr. Burien reports the discovery of the fact that New Jersey State Judges are > vested in a personal retirement guarantee of $5,000,000.00, per judge, after > they serve as judges for one year. Do you need anyone to spell it out for > you? Would a New Jersey State Judge allow an attack on the squirreled away > $Billions and jeopardize his entry into $Millionaire$ status? The inner > circle gets the gold!! > > Later, Burien learned that the New Jersey official in charge of discrediting > his CAFR discoveries was a former reporter who’d been appointed Assistant State > Treasurer - even though he had no former financial background. Burien > investigated his background and learned that as a reporter he made $35,000 a > year. But as Assistant State Treasurer he made $65,000 a year - plus a Carte > Blanche expense account of $125,000. !???????? > > Burien claims this was not an aberration: "I knew there was a state data search > department which tied all agencies and departments together. I called that > department and asked for a data search on all key level directorships and > supervisory positions for all budgetary or autonomous agencies, and they came > up with some 3,500 names from several administrations. Almost 1800 of these > Directors were former editors or reporters! It is a virtual certainty that > many of these appointments were payoffs for the journalists’ previous > "cooperation" in spinning or silencing stories to suit government. > > If you conduct a comparable search in other states, you may find a similar > symbiotic relationship between government, editors, and reporters. If so, the > media’s "liberal, pro-government bias" may run much deeper than anyone has > imagined, and the ‘military-industrial complex" described by President > Eisenhower in the 1950’s may have been replaced by a "media-bureaucracy-banker > complex" in the 1990s. > > Therefore, Mr. Burien recommends that once you analyze your state’s Budget and > CAFR reports, you insist that your local news mainstream media (TV, papers, > radio) raise the "Public Awareness" by reporting the difference between the > composite "total of cash receipts from all agencies, departments, investments, > etc." and the "actual total composite revenues held or controlled." > > If your local media refuse to publicize your state’s CAFR, they may be > cooperating with a criminal agreement which has effectively silenced public > disclosure of the CAFR reports for over forty years. However, once Americans > know how much money is out there, where it’s coming from and where it’s going - > the government’s game will be over. > > Any media that refuses to make immediate mention of the CAFR report should be > publicly and aggressively boycotted. Media exposure is the jugular vein of > the evil and corruption. > Walter J. Burien, Jr. > P.O. Box 11444 > Prescott, Arizona 86304 > Tel: 520-445-3532 > Email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > > [Image] > [Image] > [ Home ] [ Site Map ] [ TTSF ] [ Contract ] [ Individual ] [ Ragnar Redbeard ] >>> >> > > > --------------------------- ONElist Sponsor ---------------------------- Get what you deserve with NextCard Visa. ZERO. Rates as low as 0.0 percent Intro APR, online balance transfers, Rewards Points, no hidden fees, and much more. Get NextCard today and get the credit you deserve. Apply now! Get your NextCard Visa at <a href=" http://clickme.onelist.com/ad/NextcardCreative6 ">Click Here</a> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
