AIG Receives Fourth Bailout "Loan"

Betsy Ross
Earlier this month it was announced that London based AIG ("American" International Group) is to receive another 30 billion dollars due to fourth quarter losses under the terms of the September bailout passed by the Bush Administration, and supported by the two presidential candidates at the time, John McCain and Barack Obama.

American International Group is a London based insurer with subsidiaries in over 130 countries worldwide. After their claimed bankruptcy, of course, the executives of this conglomerate sought refuge at some of America's finest resorts, and also embarked on a British hunting trip to the tune of over $444,000.

The Washington "spin" that has being placed on this bailout of a global corporation at the American taxpayer's expense is the impact such a bankruptcy would have here in the U.S. since there are many Americans either heavily invested in AIG or who are covered under their policies.

My question is just how is our federal government accorded any authority under our Constitution to "bail out" corporate private businesses, and especially a "global" one, indebting this country and the American people for their bad business decisions? With respect specifically to AIG as a global entity, this question is not just fundamental it is actually banned through the writings of our founders warning of entangling ourselves in "global" interests, rather than America's which are separate and distinct as a sovereign nation.

This bailout and the stimulus that now exceeds the GNP of 3/4's the nations in the world would appear to me to be more political in nature, and a manipulated crisis at that. With 130 subsidiaries worldwide, why is AIG simply not selling off a portion of it's assets since it is clear over-reach was involved in the global expansion efforts. Why is this "bankruptcy" not in our federal courts so that they are a matter of public record but rather the Secretary of the Treasury assigned the trusteeship for this "bankruptcy" outside public scrutiny?

Why would we entangle this country's economy with that of a global concern that we fought a war in 1776 to escape - England and "corporate" dominance and control of our government. The further this country falls into debt, the more it stimulates foreign investment, and the more it facilitates globalism or "One World Government," the very government our founder's abhorred in this "land of the free" they were attempting to create - free from foreign intrusion and foreign rule.

Just what are those in Washington thinking, and under what "Rule of Law" are they now operating? Every man/woman for himself? There has definitely been a major shift from America and American interests first to a global focus. Every evening on the news the term "global economy" is being reinforced in America's subconsciousness. However, just who entangled us in this "global economy?" The bankers, Wall Street and Washington, of course. And it would appear that the outcome has not been positive and is clearly destroying this country and the American way of life.

The details of this latest welfare given to AIG can be seen at: http://thenewamerican.com/economy/sectors-mainmenu-46/845
British Mayfair Office: http://www.guardian.co.uk/business/2009/mar/02/mayfair-office-brought-down-aig
The retreat: http://www.wisebread.com/the-aig-retreat-pictures-why-its-worse-than-you-think

Published by Betsy Ross

Former legal professional and long time resident of the State of Arizona. Have written numerous articles for publication with respect to private property rights, immigration and Constitutional issues.  View profile

2 Comments

Post a Comment
  • Betsy Ross3/19/2009

    Not to mention simply the fact that it was definitely fraud upon the American public, since our Constitution does not afford those on the Hill to "bailout" a foreign company on the backs of Americans. AIG is not U.S. based, it is based in Britain, and it was their British office that actually mismanaged and let the company's finances decline. And since AIG made some major contributions to our Congressman, most likely with 130 branches was not even bankrupt to begin with. This is mony laundering, since some of those sums actually went to Goldman Sachs, who is a part owner of the Fed, which is the entity that extended the 'credit' to them on the backs of Americans. So they borrowed, in essense, from the very entity to whom they were indebted. Criminal actually.

  • samaira3/7/2009

    A very well written piece.

Displaying Comments

To comment, please sign in to your Yahoo! account, or sign up for a new account.