Good riddance to the feckers I say

AnOrdinaryJoe · 03-07-2013 08:54PM #1

Another bad day for ordinary bank branch employees.

Methinks those who say Ulster Bank is less than committed to Ireland may be right (announced today another 1,800 staff / 40 branches to go).

Aside from inconvenience to some re closure of branches, especially in rural areas......good riddance to the Right Bunch of Schiesters (RBS) owned bank anyway.

And also announced today.......The First Trust Bank (AIB's bank in the north) is to shut four branches in Northern Ireland.

The branch in Ballymoney, Co Antrim, is due to close at the end of September with the shutters coming down on two branches in Belfast and a fourth in Ballynahinch, Co Down, by the end of November.

The closures are part of an ongoing restructuring programme, according to the bank and the announcement follows the decision by the Ulster Bank to lay off as many as 1,800 staff and close up to 40 branches, the vast majority in the Republic.

Fr_Dougal · 03-07-2013 08:56PM

Jesus wept...what an ill informed post...

AnOrdinaryJoe · 03-07-2013 08:58PM

Fr_Dougal wrote: »

Jesus wept...what an ill informed post...

Mmmmmmmmmmmmmm.....

Peregrine · 03-07-2013 09:00PM

Fr_Dougal wrote: »

Jesus wept...what an ill informed post...

Apt username too

Celly Smunt · 03-07-2013 09:02PM

Deadly! Loads more people losing jobs and going on to struggle the dole,high five OP

Cee-Jay-Cee · 03-07-2013 09:05PM

The biggest majority of those redundancies have already happened in UB and rest will happen soon through natural wastage.

Almaviva · 03-07-2013 09:09PM

AnOrdinaryJoe wrote: »

Another bad day for ordinary bank branch employees.

Methinks those who say Ulster Bank is less than committed to Ireland may be right (announced today another 1,800 staff / 40 branches to go).

Aside from inconvenience to some re closure of branches, especially in rural areas......good riddance to the Right Bunch of Schiesters (RBS) owned bank anyway.

And also announced today.......The First Trust Bank (AIB's bank in the north) is to shut four branches in Northern Ireland.

The branch in Ballymoney, Co Antrim, is due to close at the end of September with the shutters coming down on two branches in Belfast and a fourth in Ballynahinch, Co Down, by the end of November.

The closures are part of an ongoing restructuring programme, according to the bank and the announcement follows the decision by the Ulster Bank to lay off as many as 1,800 staff and close up to 40 branches, the vast majority in the Republic.

Great news for tax payers. Zombie overweight banks being slimmed down to run under their own steam again rather than collecting handouts from the rest of us.

Delighted.

kneemos · 03-07-2013 09:14PM

CJC999 wrote: »

The biggest majority of those redundancies have already happened in UB and rest will happen soon through natural wastage.

Still job losses.

Crann na Beatha · 03-07-2013 09:14PM

This post has been deleted.

Fr_Dougal · 03-07-2013 09:17PM

Almaviva wrote: »

Great news for tax payers. Zombie overweight banks being slimmed down to run under their own steam again rather than collecting handouts from the rest of us.

Delighted.

How much did Ulster Bank cost the taxpayer here?

Anyone · 03-07-2013 09:20PM

Almaviva wrote: »

Great news for tax payers. Zombie overweight banks being slimmed down to run under their own steam again rather than collecting handouts from the rest of us.

Delighted.

Ulster Bank/RBS is British.

lkionm · 03-07-2013 09:26PM

What a lovely well informed OP. A true breath of fresh air. He sure knows his stuff.

Of those 1800 staff how many are just average Joes just doing a job to pay bills and to live.

Jesus, that has to be the most idiotic post I have read in AH since the infamous traveler thread.

Use your brain for 2 seconds.

I challenge anyone to find me a more idiotic post.

Lapin · 03-07-2013 09:32PM

Go home OP.

You're either drunk, or hanging around too many barstool philosophers.

Either way, you haven't got a balls notion about what you're talking about.

Frank Black · 03-07-2013 09:33PM

lkionm wrote: »

What a lovely well informed OP. A true breath of fresh air. He sure knows his stuff.

Of those 1800 staff how many are just average Joes just doing a job to pay bills and to live.

Jesus, that has to be the most idiotic post I have read in AH since the infamous traveler thread.

Use your brain for 2 seconds.

I challenge anyone to find me a more idiotic post.

Challenge accepted.

Happyliving wrote: »

Just wondering can my parents just kick me out of the family home? Have i got s
Any rights to stay? Im also an adult, just need some advice before they try to evict me! Thanks...

lkionm · 03-07-2013 09:34PM

Lapin wrote: »

Go home OP.

You're either drunk, or hanging around too many barstool philosophers.

Either way, you haven't got a balls notion about what you're talking about.

Seems like the sort of person to shout at the person behind the counter of a shop because he thinks they set the price.

lkionm · 03-07-2013 09:35PM

Frank Black wrote: »

Challenge accepted.

Is that his son perhaps?

AnOrdinaryJoe · 03-07-2013 09:42PM

Celly Smunt wrote: »

Deadly! Loads more people losing jobs and going on to struggle the dole,high five OP

Ulster Bank is owned by Right Bunch of Schiesters (RBS), or to give it it's proper name, Royal Bank of Scotland (RBS), an organisation which has systematically engaged in massive fraud and corruption and activities connected to same.

No-one would imply that ordinary front line staff routinely engaged in same, although some may have.

RBS is a criminally minded organisation (the facts speak for themselves i.e Libor (fraud), PPI mis-selling (fraud), swap rate manipulations (fraud), and so much more of the same sort of stuff...... and it is an organisation which has been shown to lie time and time again, even in court scenarios.

The ethics of this organisation is in the gutter...... it is an organisation which gives even blood sucking parasites a bad name.

A significant proportion of its revenues, and thus its profits, have been derived from criminal activities.

By definition, anyone who makes or derives money from connection to any criminally minded or operating organisation is complicit....... it may not be 'nice' to acknowledge this and it may be unfair too some.

But........ it not being nice it being unfair doesn't make it inappropriate or inaccurate.

If some persons were deriving their income from activities i.e. working for, a criminal organisation, say for instance a drugs cartel, and they knew that that organisation was making money from criminal activities.... would they be considered to be not complicit....... I think they would.

And RBS, as most know, including most or all employees, were a criminally operating organisation...... that much has been demonstrated, and my persons eminently better positioned and qualified than I am to illustrate same.

And they are the organisation which is most responsible for the austerity measures in UK which are having such a devastating effect on the UK, having had the biggest bail out in UK history.

What does anyone think the hard pressed UK Taxpayer would rather have at this time....... the £45 billion which would make lives so much better at this time, or the 82% taxpayer ownership of this corrupt bank, a position which is totally worthless, meaningless and benefitless at this time ?

I reckon they'd rather have the money...........

And I'm sorry to say it and as 'unfair' as it may be...... but Ulster Bank employees, even the nice ones, knowing as they do regarding the activities, etc of the organisation they work for....... are complicit.

lkionm · 03-07-2013 09:51PM

AnOrdinaryJoe wrote: »

Ulster Bank is owned by Right Bunch of Schiesters (RBS), or to give it it's proper name, Royal Bank of Scotland (RBS), an organisation which has systematically engaged in massive fraud and corruption and activities connected to same.

No-one would imply that ordinary front line staff routinely engaged in same, although some may have.

RBS is a criminally minded organisation (the facts speak for themselves i.e Libor (fraud), PPI mis-selling (fraud), swap rate manipulations (fraud), and so much more of the same sort of stuff...... and it is an organisation which has been shown to lie time and time again, even in court scenarios.

The ethics of this organisation is in the gutter...... it is an organisation which gives even blood sucking parasites a bad name.

A significant proportion of its revenues, and thus its profits, have been derived from criminal activities.

By definition, anyone who makes or derives money from connection to any criminally minded or operating organisation is complicit....... it may not be 'nice' to acknowledge this and it may be unfair too some.

But........ it not being nice it being unfair doesn't make it inappropriate or inaccurate.

If some persons were deriving their income from activities i.e. working for, a criminal organisation, say for instance a drugs cartel, and they knew that that organisation was making money from criminal activities.... would they be considered to be not complicit....... I think they would.

And RBS, as most know, including most or all employees, were a criminally operating organisation...... that much has been demonstrated, and my persons eminently better positioned and qualified than I am to illustrate same.

And they are the organisation which is most responsible for the austerity measures in UK which are having such a devastating effect on the UK, having had the biggest bail out in UK history.

What does anyone think the hard pressed UK Taxpayer would rather have at this time....... the £45 billion which would make lives so much better at this time, or the 82% taxpayer ownership of this corrupt bank, a position which is totally worthless, meaningless and benefitless at this time ?

I reckon they'd rather have the money...........

And I'm sorry to say it and as 'unfair' as it may be...... but Ulster Bank employees, even the nice ones, knowing as they do regarding the activities, etc of the organisation they work for....... are complicit.

Wow. Fair enough we get the spiel that banks are bad mmmkay, but the people just working there have absolutely nothing to do with any decisions that are made in a boardroom.

Do you go down to the local petrol station and say they are complicit in petrol cartels? Maybe you should do that as well.

Do you give out to barman for serving alcohol as they are complicit in alcholism?

Your posts are simply and utterly idiotic and are just completely immature, and that is coming from me. You are giving out about normal people losing their jobs from a boardroom decision which 99.99% had no say in.

The vast vast majority of people working in banks are just your normal people who you meet out at 3 o clock in a kebab shop with kebab sauce all down their penneys clothes.
Some have families and children.

AnOrdinaryJoe · 03-07-2013 09:52PM

lkionm wrote: »

What a lovely well informed OP. A true breath of fresh air. He sure knows his stuff.

Of those 1800 staff how many are just average Joes just doing a job to pay bills and to live.

Jesus, that has to be the most idiotic post I have read in AH since the infamous traveler thread.

Use your brain for 2 seconds.

I challenge anyone to find me a more idiotic post.

So...... it's ok to 'work' for any organisation which just happens to be a criminally active one (as I stated before...... the facts speak for themselves)...... just as long as you turn a blind eye and conveniently forget that your efforts are helping to create profits for a criminally operating organisation.

The old 'the monthly pay cheque has no conscience' or 'I'm alright so **** the victims' sort of attitude some, or many, seem comfortable to have.

I wonder if the families of the 10,000 people per annum on average who, assisted in their criminal activities by HSBE who actively laundered their ill gotten gains, aided also by the co-operative stance of the current chairman of one of our so called 'pillar banks' when in charge at the division of HSBC at a time when they were doing the money laundering, have been murdered by Mexican drug cartels, frequently de-capitated and mutilated, and their bodies dumped, frequently en masse, on waste ground or by the sides of roads.

Somehow I can't see those people simply taking the attitude 'ach....sure they were only doing their job'.

Idiotic post...... I don't think so...... some people simply can't stomach the truth.

But just cos it isn't a nice truth doesn't mean that it isn't the truth.

daithi1970 · 03-07-2013 09:56PM

AnOrdinaryJoe wrote: »

So...... it's ok to 'work' for any organisation which just happens to be a criminally active one (as I stated before...... the facts speak for themselves)...... just as long as you turn a blind eye and conveniently forget that your efforts are helping to create profits for a criminally operating organisation.

The old 'the monthly pay cheque has no conscience' or 'I'm alright so **** the victims' sort of attitude some, or many, seem comfortable to have.

I wonder if the families of the 10,000 people per annum on average who, assisted in their criminal activities by HSBE who actively laundered their ill gotten gains, aided also by the co-operative stance of the current chairman of one of our so called 'pillar banks' when in charge at the division of HSBC at a time when they were doing the money laundering, have been murdered by Mexican drug cartels, frequently de-capitated and mutilated, and their bodies dumped, frequently en masse, on waste ground or by the sides of roads.

Somehow I can't see those people simply taking the attitude 'ach....sure they were only doing their job'.

Idiotic post...... I don't think so...... some people simply can't stomach the truth.

But just cos it isn't a nice truth doesn't mean that it isn't the truth.

your tinfoil hat might have slipped a bit there..

lkionm · 03-07-2013 09:59PM

AnOrdinaryJoe wrote: »

So...... it's ok to 'work' for any organisation which just happens to be a criminally active one (as I stated before...... the facts speak for themselves)...... just as long as you turn a blind eye and conveniently forget that your efforts are helping to create profits for a criminally operating organisation.

The old 'the monthly pay cheque has no conscience' or 'I'm alright so **** the victims' sort of attitude some, or many, seem comfortable to have.

I wonder if the families of the 10,000 people per annum on average who, assisted in their criminal activities by HSBE who actively laundered their ill gotten gains, aided also by the co-operative stance of the current chairman of one of our so called 'pillar banks' when in charge at the division of HSBC at a time when they were doing the money laundering, have been murdered by Mexican drug cartels, frequently de-capitated and mutilated, and their bodies dumped, frequently en masse, on waste ground or by the sides of roads.

Somehow I can't see those people simply taking the attitude 'ach....sure they were only doing their job'.

Idiotic post...... I don't think so...... some people simply can't stomach the truth.

But just cos it isn't a nice truth doesn't mean that it isn't the truth.

Links or it didnt happen.

I still cant wrap my head around what you are trying to say, mostly due to you adding in words where they do not make any grammatical sense but I got around that and are you trying to tell me the Mexican Cartel are murdering people who work for the company that own Ulster bank?

Now, while we all that we live in a land with no justice system I cannot fathom that. I havent seen any Cartel members going into my branch when I go in.

AnOrdinaryJoe · 03-07-2013 09:59PM

lkionm wrote: »

Wow. Fair enough we get the spiel that banks are bad mmmkay, but the people just working there have absolutely nothing to do with any decisions that are made in a boardroom.

Do you go down to the local petrol station and say they are complicit in petrol cartels? Maybe you should do that as well.

Do you give out to barman for serving alcohol as they are complicit in alcholism?

Your posts are simply and utterly idiotic and are just completely immature, and that is coming from me. You are giving out about normal people losing their jobs from a boardroom decision which 99.99% had no say in.

The vast vast majority of people working in banks are just your normal people who you meet out at 3 o clock in a kebab shop with kebab sauce all down their penneys clothes.
Some have families and children.

They do....... but it doesn't take away the fact that their incomes are derived from working i.e. providing services to a criminally operating organisation.

As I alluded to before....... many of these ordinary employees are not the ones who have set the corporate tone, who have determined the rules and regulations or the 'type of' rules and regulations...... they are, to put in in simple terms 'just doing their jobs'.

Jobs at an organisation which has engaged in massive fraud and corruption...........and whether some of you like it or not....... this is 'complicity', not necessarily intentional. etc...... but complicit nevertheless.

It's an inconvenient truth I'm afraid.

.......and I can understand how someone, someone perhaps who considers himself or herself to be a 'good person', would be annoyed at this....... still true though.

AnOrdinaryJoe · 03-07-2013 10:02PM

lkionm wrote: »

Links or it didnt happen.

I still cant wrap my head around what you are trying to say, mostly due to you adding in words where they do not make any grammatical sense but I got around that and are you trying to tell me the Mexican Cartel are murdering people who work for the company that own Ulster bank?

Now, while we all that we live in a land with no justice system I cannot fathom that. I havent seen any Cartel members going into my branch when I go in.

No..... I'm not saying that..... firstly Ulster Bank/RBS isn't an Irish pillar bank.

There is plenty available regarding HSBC's and key personnel's connection to money laundering for Mexican drug cartels........... which, as far as I am concerned is criminal type activity.

AnOrdinaryJoe · 03-07-2013 10:09PM

Quote:
Originally Posted by lkionm
Wow. Fair enough we get the spiel that banks are bad mmmkay, but the people just working there have absolutely nothing to do with any decisions that are made in a boardroom.

Decisions may be made at boardroom level........ but those who sit in the boardroom and make those decisions cannot simply make their corporate decisions permeate through their organisations.

For that to happen they need an army of compliant and obedient foot soldiers to see the decisions through to actions, people who normally it would seem people operate to a 'see no evil, hear no evil' position in return for the monthly pay cheque.

Fraud and corruption do not prevail because of mere words alone...... the words have to be followed through...... and they have to be followed through by...... get this concept....... by 'people'..... real living breathing people, not friggin' robots as some might prefer to believe.

As stated....... sometimes the truth is not pleasant or palatable....... but it is nevertheless 'the truth'.

lkionm · 03-07-2013 10:09PM

You never answered my question about going down to the bar and giving out to the barman or the worker at a petrol station.

Am I complicit in the work conditions of some places and work deaths because I buy my clothes from Penneys or Nike or dont buy fairtrade?

Am I complicit in someone becoming obese because I put too much cheese in her sandwich?

I can do this all day, it just seems like you have a chip on your shoulder on a moral crusade.

You have no idea about banking systems and what they do and you have been watching too many movies.

thebag89 · 03-07-2013 10:10PM

Looks like It's feeding time down at the Troll enclosure.:D

lkionm · 03-07-2013 10:12PM

thebag89 wrote: »

Looks like It's feeding time down at the Troll enclosure.:D

Nom nom nom nom nom nom nom nom nom

steddyeddy · 03-07-2013 10:18PM

Ordinary bank workers in my experience have been wonderful op. They don't decide loaning policy and they didn't engage in the same level of fraud ect as those up top.

AnOrdinaryJoe · 03-07-2013 10:26PM

lkionm wrote: »

1) You never answered my question about going down to the bar and giving out to the barman or the worker at a petrol station.

2) Am I complicit in the work conditions of some places and work deaths because I buy my clothes from Penneys or Nike or dont buy fairtrade?

3) Am I complicit in someone becoming obese because I put too much cheese in her sandwich?

4) I can do this all day, it just seems like you have a chip on your shoulder on a moral crusade.

5) You have no idea about banking systems and what they do and you have been watching too many movies.

1) Stupid argument - every sane individual is responsible for their quantity of intake ow whatever he or she may intake.

2) Yes....... many people died and lost limbs recently in Bangladesh....... but that wasn't the first or only similar disaster in a Bangladeshi factory manufacturing cheap clothing for the western market. Others went un-reported.

Those people pay a huge price for our insatiable desire for cheap products..... other than the few euros we hand over we don't feckin' pay..... they do.

So.. in answer to your question.... YES.... you/anyone who buys cheap clothes from Penney's, etc are complicit. You're blind if you can't see that.

3) Same answer as 1)

4) So..... by your logic anyone who objects to the sort of stuff I , and many others, have a problem with, are to be regarded simply as 'having a chip on my shoulder' or a 'moral crusaders'. What a simplistic view you have......

5) Wrong..... I have a very good i.e. in depth idea of how the banking system works on many levels. I do like movies..... and some of them might even have storylines which are connected in some shape or form to banks...... and many don't. I particularly love Spinal Tap...... unfortunately no banks in that one.

Any more absurd 'comments' gratefully received......

AnOrdinaryJoe · 03-07-2013 10:32PM

steddyeddy wrote: »

Ordinary bank workers in my experience have been wonderful op. They don't decide loaning policy and they didn't engage in the same level of fraud ect as those up top.

Agreed..... I get that..... you're right.

But....... 'they' still derive their incomes from providing their services (their time and their labour) to an organisation which, knowingly to 'them', is indisputably connected to criminal. fraudulent, corrupt, call it what you want.... behaviours and activities.... FACT !

And, regardless of whether some of you wish to acknowledge it or not, is determined to be 'complicit'.

I'm not saying that many or all of them are bad people as such, or that they chose to or deliberately set out to be connected in any shape or form to any criminally operating organisation........ but the indisputable fact is...... they are.

I get that some do not like it and that it is unpalatable to some.

But it's still fact.

lkionm · 03-07-2013 10:36PM

AnOrdinaryJoe wrote: »

1) Stupid argument - every sane individual is responsible for their quantity of intake ow whatever he or she may intake.

2) Yes....... many people died and lost limbs recently in Bangladesh....... but that wasn't the first or only similar disaster in a Bangladeshi factory manufacturing cheap clothing for the western market. Others went un-reported.

Those people pay a huge price for our insatiable desire for cheap products..... other than the few euros we hand over we don't feckin' pay..... they do.

So.. in answer to your question.... YES.... you/anyone who buys cheap clothes from Penney's, etc are complicit. You're blind if you can't see that.

3) Same answer as 1)

4) So..... by your logic anyone who objects to the sort of stuff I , and many others, have a problem with, are to be regarded simply as 'having a chip on my shoulder' or a 'moral crusaders'. What a simplistic view you have......

5) Wrong..... I have a very good i.e. in depth idea of how the banking system works on many levels. I do like movies..... and some of them might even have storylines which are connected in some shape or form to banks...... and many don't. I particularly love Spinal Tap...... unfortunately no banks in that one.

Any more absurd 'comments' gratefully received......

Pop quiz, what is a credit default swap or sub prime market.
How does a bank create money?
What is the IS/LM model?

So you call my argument about alcohol stupid, but surely any sane person should have borrowed only as much as they could afford?
A bit similiar to how you should only drink as much as you can handle.

What about the people who banked with Ulster bank, you know they were the only bank to give students an interest free overdraft. Fair enough, this is my only experience of banking with Ulster bank and for collecting bags of change for work which they didnt charge me any service charge even though they were supposed to charge 5 euro.

I'm not one to jump to any assumptions but there is no way you are an adult? What I mean is, you sound like an 18 year old rambling on the side of the street trying to make a difference but the man keeps getting you down.

Apologies if you are not and are a fully functional human being.

AnOrdinaryJoe · 04-07-2013 12:44PM

lkionm wrote: »

1) Pop quiz, what is a credit default swap or sub prime market.
How does a bank create money?
What is the IS/LM model?

2) So you call my argument about alcohol stupid, but surely any sane person should have borrowed only as much as they could afford?

A bit similiar to how you should only drink as much as you can handle.

3) What about the people who banked with Ulster bank, you know they were the only bank to give students an interest free overdraft. Fair enough, this is my only experience of banking with Ulster bank and for collecting bags of change for work which they didnt charge me any service charge even though they were supposed to charge 5 euro.

1) I am the first to admit that there is much about the banking sector I do not understand nor do I want to...... in the same way that there is much about the ordinary man and woman which the banking sector doesn't understand i.e. why do entities within the sector have to rip people off by engaging in fraud, deception and various corrupt activities.

I couldn't give a flying f**k about IS/LM etc...... I do give a flyng f**k about being a victim of criminal activity.

You are obviously a much more intelligent person than I am..... I thank you for giving your time to setting me right on my misguided ideas regarding what is right and what is wrong.

2) Banks targetted people i.e. students without any means of income and living off student loans, without asking, being bombarded with serious levels of credit via credit cards, etc (just one of many examples)....... whereas I don't know of any pub which 'targets' anyone and gives them copious amounts of alcohol and tell them they can pay later.

And of course if that was the case, you can be sure that many would take the booze on offer and drink themselves into oblivion, and the levels of alcoholism and other huge negatives on lives would prevail.

Your comparison is absurd.

3) Ulster bank...... they didnt charge me any service charge even though they were supposed to charge 5 euro.

Their parent company, RBS, wasn't supposed to engage in the many examples of criminal activity they engaged in........ but they did.

A 5 euro charge...... or massive multi £ billion charge...... mmmm..... I wonder which one should be regarded with the most importance or relevance ?

Again, your comparison is absurd.

Other) You never came back with any justification for your support of significant UK tax dodger Primark/Penneys and the terrible price others pay so you can have your cheap tee shirts, etc.

I'm not one to jump to any assumptions but there is no way you are an adult?
What I mean is, you sound like an 18 year old rambling on the side of the street trying to make a difference but the man keeps getting you down.

Apologies if you are not and are a fully functional human being.

So...... what makes you 'an adult'..... or a better adult than me ?

AnOrdinaryJoe · 04-07-2013 12:49PM

AnOrdinaryJoe wrote: »

They do....... but it doesn't take away the fact that their incomes are derived from working i.e. providing services to a criminally operating organisation.

As I alluded to before....... many of these ordinary employees are not the ones who have set the corporate tone, who have determined the rules and regulations or the 'type of' rules and regulations...... they are, to put in in simple terms 'just doing their jobs'.

Jobs at an organisation which has engaged in massive fraud and corruption...........and whether some of you like it or not....... this is 'complicity', not necessarily intentional. etc...... but complicit nevertheless.

It's an inconvenient truth I'm afraid.

.......and I can understand how someone, someone perhaps who considers himself or herself to be a 'good person', would be annoyed at this....... still true though.

com•plic•it (k m-pl s t)

An individual is complicit in a crime if he/she is aware of its occurrence and has the ability to report the crime, but fails to do so. As such, the individual effectively allows criminals to carry out a crime despite possibly being able to stop them, either directly or by contacting the authorities, thus making the individual a de facto accessory to the crime rather than an innocent bystander.

com•plic•it (k m-pl s t)
adj.
Associated with or participating in a questionable act or a crime; having complicity:

Valetta · 04-07-2013 12:55PM

OP, what did you hope to achieve by starting nonsensical rants on boards?

Head on over to Banking or Irish Economy forums and see how long your threads will last.

Fool.

NTMK · 04-07-2013 01:01PM

AnOrdinaryJoe wrote: »

com•plic•it (k m-pl s t)

An individual is complicit in a crime if he/she is aware of its occurrence and has the ability to report the crime, but fails to do so. As such, the individual effectively allows criminals to carry out a crime despite possibly being able to stop them, either directly or by contacting the authorities, thus making the individual a de facto accessory to the crime rather than an innocent bystander.

com•plic•it (k m-pl s t)
adj.
Associated with or participating in a questionable act or a crime; having complicity:

How many bank cashiers do you think even know what Libor and swap rate manipulation are?

not ****ing many these thing are done by high up execs (the only people with the power to move enough money to engage in such activities

as for willingly supporting those activities you better throw all your stuff away as nothing you own will have been made without some kind of illegal activity taking place

Jesus

AnOrdinaryJoe · 04-07-2013 01:16PM

As I have stated previously, I do not imply, never have implied that all bank employees are bad people or deliberately chose to take a career path which brought them into an area of complicity.

Nevertheless...... by definition....... they are.

They provide their services (time and labour) to an organisation which has derived a significant proportion of its revenues and its profits from criminal activity.... FACT !

It's unfortunate, an unpalatable or inconvenient truth........ but as much as for whatever reason some prefer not to acknowledge it, it is the truth

com•plic•it (k m-pl s t)

An individual is complicit in a crime if he/she is aware of its occurrence and has the ability to report the crime, but fails to do so. As such, the individual effectively allows criminals to carry out a crime despite possibly being able to stop them, either directly or by contacting the authorities, thus making the individual a de facto accessory to the crime rather than an innocent bystander.

com•plic•it (k m-pl s t)
adj.
Associated with or participating in a questionable act or a crime; having complicity:

Valetta · 04-07-2013 01:19PM

AnOrdinaryJoe wrote: »

As I have stated previously, I do not imply, never have implied that all bank employees are bad people or deliberately chose to take a career path which brought them into an area of complicity.

Read your own thread title lately? :rolleyes:

NTMK · 04-07-2013 01:20PM

AnOrdinaryJoe wrote: »

As I have stated previously, I do not imply, never have implied that all bank employees are bad people or deliberately chose to take a career path which brought them into an area of complicity.

Nevertheless...... by definition....... they are.

They provide their services (time and labour) to an organisation which has derived a significant proportion of its revenues and its profits from criminal activity.... FACT !

It's unfortunate, an unpalatable or inconvenient truth........ but as much as for whatever reason some prefer not to acknowledge it, it is the truth

com•plic•it (k m-pl s t)

An individual is complicit in a crime if he/she is aware of its occurrence and has the ability to report the crime, but fails to do so. As such, the individual effectively allows criminals to carry out a crime despite possibly being able to stop them, either directly or by contacting the authorities, thus making the individual a de facto accessory to the crime rather than an innocent bystander.

No cashier would have known about the various **** RBS and every other bank were up to as they are not privvy to that information

and by that definition we're all complicit as we all have our money in a bank:rolleyes:

AnOrdinaryJoe · 04-07-2013 01:24PM

NTMK wrote: »

No cashier would have known about the various **** RBS and every other bank were up to as they are not privvy to that information

and by that definition we're all complicit as we all have our money in a bank:rolleyes:

You bank on about 'cashiers'..... there are a lot more roles in banks than 'cashiers' you know.

AnOrdinaryJoe · 04-07-2013 01:24PM

Valetta wrote: »

Read your own thread title lately? :rolleyes:

'As I have stated previously, I do not imply, never have implied that ALLl bank employees are bad people or deliberately chose to take a career path which brought them into an area of complicity'

NTMK · 04-07-2013 01:29PM

AnOrdinaryJoe wrote: »

You bank on about 'cashiers'..... there are a lot more roles in banks than 'cashiers' you know.

In your local bank branch you have cashiers,managers, a couple of accountants (if that) and a risk accesor

None of the people that were complict in all the **** rbs do work in a branch or were sacked. they work in the companies corparate hq and are effectively untouched

AnOrdinaryJoe · 04-07-2013 01:46PM

NTMK wrote: »

How many bank cashiers do you think even know what Libor and swap rate manipulation are?

not ****ing many these thing are done by high up execs (the only people with the power to move enough money to engage in such activities

as for willingly supporting those activities you better throw all your stuff away as nothing you own will have been made without some kind of illegal activity taking place

Jesus

Scenario 1 - I don't work for an 'entity' which is connected to any sort of criminal activity. I don't knowingly work for an entity which is connected to any sort of criminal activity

Scenario 2 - Person a), a bank official) Ah Jaysus, there's my monthly pay cheque..... time to go out and spend some of this hard earned dosh. That's a nice wee tee shirt, I'll have that...... meanwhile some individual Person b) who has worked hard and lost his modest life's savings because of some dodgy bank scam is wondering how he should end his life..... tablets or toaster in the bath, what would be the easiest....... back to Person a), it's not my problem if b) tops himself because of his financial woes... yes, I knew that some of the stuff was asked to do and actually do was wrong, and has contributed to the perilous position some people like Person b) are now in, but I didn't come up with the idea, I simply did as I was told, I was simply doing my job...... now, what colour suits me best, the blue tee shirt or the pink one.......... meanwhile back at Person b)'s place...... Darling, I'm just borrowing the toaster for a while........

NTMK · 04-07-2013 01:53PM

AnOrdinaryJoe wrote: »

Scenario 1 - I don't work for an 'entity' which is connected to any sort of criminal activity. I don't knowingly work for an entity which is connected to any sort of criminal activity

Scenario 2 - Person a), a bank official) Ah Jaysus, there's my monthly pay cheque..... time to go out and spend some of this hard earned dosh. That's a nice wee tee shirt, I'll have that...... meanwhile some individual Person b) who has worked hard and lost his modest life's savings because of some dodgy bank scam is wondering how he should end his life..... tablets or toaster in the bath, what would be the easiest....... back to Person a), it's not my problem if b) tops himself because of his financial woes... yes, I knew that some of the stuff was asked to do and actually do was wrong, and has contributed to the perilous position some people like Person b) are now in, but I didn't come up with the idea, I simply did as I was told, I was simply doing my job...... now, what colour suits me best, the blue tee shirt or the pink one.......... meanwhile back at Person b)'s place...... Darling, I'm just borrowing the toaster for a while........

you fail to mention how person a) would have any knowledge in the scam (or knowledge of it being a scam) that person b) finds himself in as the only person person b) deals with in the bank is a cashier/manager with no knowledge of whatever scam the execs are passing of as a scam

AnOrdinaryJoe · 04-07-2013 02:07PM

lkionm wrote: »

Links or it didnt happen.

I still cant wrap my head around what you are trying to say, mostly due to you adding in words where they do not make any grammatical sense but I got around that and are you trying to tell me the Mexican Cartel are murdering people who work for the company that own Ulster bank?

Now, while we all that we live in a land with no justice system I cannot fathom that. I havent seen any Cartel members going into my branch when I go in.

Maybe lkionm, this sort of 'stuff' is regarded by you as unimportant........ to some, many possibly, I don't think it is.

Maybe you are unable to 'fathom' it.

The 'Cartel members' as you refer to them are probably a wee bit more subtle than flashing their activities and ill gotten gains, etc around your local Ulster Bank branch or any other local branch of any other bank..... I would think.

27th March 2013 - The chairman of AIB, David Hodgkinson, said that 2012 had seen further progress in the “re-establishment of AIB as a stable, soundly functioning bank”.

1st November 2012 - Mr Hodgkinson will receive a relatively modest €500,000 a year, the maximum a bank executive can earn at a bank here supported by the Irish state.

'In 2005 and 2006, HSBC processed about 1,800 U-turn transactions through a correspondent account at JP Morgan Chase & Co. The report quoted an email from HSBC Middle East Deputy Chairman David Hodgkinson saying that HSBC’s U.S. unit was “unwilling to process them for reputational risk reasons.” '

'.....reporters and photographers have chronicled, from both sides of the border, the savage struggle among many Mexican drug cartels for control over the lucrative drug trade to the U.S. The conflict has left thousands dead, paralysed whole cities with fear and spanned a culture of corruption reaching the upper levels......'

'Money laundering is a crime. Aiding and abetting terrorists is a crime'

com•plic•it (k m-pl s t)

An individual is complicit in a crime if he/she is aware of its occurrence and has the ability to report the crime, but fails to do so. As such, the individual effectively allows criminals to carry out a crime despite possibly being able to stop them, either directly or by contacting the authorities, thus making the individual a de facto accessory to the crime rather than an innocent bystander.

com•plic•it (k m-pl s t)
adj.
Associated with or participating in a questionable act or a crime; having complicity:

The report (US Senate Report) quoted an email from HSBC Middle East Deputy Chairman (and current AIB Chairman) David Hodgkinson

*** and still the tills (were) kept ringing ***

One of the report’s largest sections focuses on HSBC Mexico, which shipped $7 billion in cash to HSBC’s U.S. bank in 2007 and 2008 — outpacing all HSBC affiliates and other banks in Mexico and leaving U.S. authorities concerned the volumes could only be supplied by the illegal drug trade, the report said.

Iran Transactions

In the six years until 2006, two HSBC affiliates sent thousands of Iran-involved transactions through the U.S. bank without telling the U.S. bankers they involved Iran. Internal communications show the U.S. bankers were aware that some of the transactions were linked to Iran in violation of U.S. sanctions. Similar transactions came from a list of other prohibited jurisdictions including North Korea, Cuba, Sudan, and Burma.

In 2005 and 2006, HSBC processed about 1,800 U-turn transactions through a correspondent account at JPMorgan Chase & Co. The report quoted an email from HSBC Middle East Deputy Chairman David Hodgkinson saying that HSBC’s U.S. unit was “unwilling to process them for reputational risk reasons.”

1st November 2012 – ‘Mr Hodgkinson will receive a relatively modest €500,000 a year, the maximum a bank executive can earn at a bank here supported by the Irish state’

It's not so much the €500,000, doubtlessly more in 2013, but the fact that evidently an association to money laundering for Mexican drug cartels and their on average of around 10,000 murders per annum, and to other entities which are associated with terrorism, does not, if you're in 'the boys club' perhaps, preclude someone from being passed as fit and proper by the regulator for a big job in banking, end evidently neither does AIB, an Irish 'pillar bank' which is fully owned by the Irish Taxpayer.

Whereas most 'normal', some might say, right thinking people...... probably think it should.

Can it be possible that the Irish taxpayer thinks it acceptable for someone with this sort of baggage to be Chairman of a Taxpayer owned so called 'pillar bank'...... I know I don't think it is ?

At least just a few weeks ago 'Lord' Stephen Green, who was, whilst he was also also at HSBC associated with the same, and then went on to become UK Trade Minister, had the good grace to resign

from: Daily Mail, 19th June 2013

Ex-HSBC boss who oversaw bank as it laundered money for terrorists quits as a minister after scathing report

However, his continued presence in a key role promoting UK businesses overseas would have been a serious embarrassment to the Coalition as it seeks to reform the banking sector.

The executive who ran HSBC while it laundered money for drug barons and terrorists yesterday quit his new role as a trade minister.

The departure of Lord Green came on the same day that the government pledged to bring in laws to jail bosses of failed lenders.

Trade Minister Lord Green 'has serious questions to answer' over HSBC money laundering

Today, a Treasury spokesman for the Labour Party challenged Lord Green to reveal if he knows anything about the scandal, which has led to the resignation of the bank’s head of compliance.

“The US Senate sub-committee’s report, which suggests that HSBC allowed money laundering by drug cartels and possibly even terrorists, is so serious that the bank’s head of compliance has already resigned,” Chris Leslie said. He added that Lord Green “now has serious questions to answer about what he knew and when”.

AnOrdinaryJoe · 04-07-2013 02:10PM

NTMK wrote: »

you fail to mention how person a) would have any knowledge in the scam (or knowledge of it being a scam) that person b) finds himself in as the only person person b) deals with in the bank is a cashier/manager with no knowledge of whatever scam the execs are passing of as a scam

OkMTMK...... you are right....... NOBODY, other than the relatively small number of top execs who make the decisions and set the corporate tone, knew anything about the various scams i.e. the frauds, the corruption, etc that were ongoing.

Silly me for thinking otherwise.........

Nemeses · 04-07-2013 02:13PM

AnOrdinaryJoe wrote: »

As I have stated previously, I do not imply, never have implied that all bank employees are bad people or deliberately chose to take a career path which brought them into an area of complicity.

Nevertheless...... by definition....... they are.

Your argument is now invalid.

I am pie · 04-07-2013 02:14PM

AnOrdinaryJoe wrote: »

OkMTMK...... you are right....... NOBODY, other than the relatively small number of top execs who make the decisions and set the corporate tone, knew anything about the various scams i.e. the frauds, the corruption, etc that were ongoing.

Silly me for thinking otherwise.........

Silly you indeed.

sil·ly \ˈsi-lē\

a : weak in intellect : foolish
b : exhibiting or indicative of a lack of common sense or sound judgment
c : trifling, frivolous

tmc86 · 04-07-2013 02:19PM

*slowly creeps back towards the homepage for a topic refresh*

AnOrdinaryJoe · 04-07-2013 02:22PM

I am pie wrote: »

Silly you indeed.

sil·ly \ˈsi-lē\
a : weak in intellect : foolish

b : exhibiting or indicative of a lack of common sense or sound judgment

c : trifling, frivolous

......and in the end it comes back to...... there are bank officials other than senior executives i.e. middle management level officials, etc who were/are complicit in bank sharp practice and collusion, etc........ there is no question of that.

We can bat and ball this until the cows come home........... but it will always come back to the facts..... which are that there are bank officials other than senior executives i.e. middle management level officials, etc who were/are complicit in bank sharp practice and collusion, etc.......we can bat and ball this until the cows come home........... but it will always come back to the facts..... which are that there are bank officials other than senior executives i.e. middle management level officials, etc who were/are complicit in bank sharp practice and collusion, etc.......

Valetta · 04-07-2013 02:24PM

I still don't know what your point is?

I am pie · 04-07-2013 02:25PM

AnOrdinaryJoe wrote: »

......and in the end it comes back to...... there are bank officials other than senior executives i.e. middle management level officials, etc who were/are complicit in bank sharp practice and collusion, etc........ there is no question of that.

We can bat and ball this until the cows come home........... but it will always come back to the facts..... which are that there are bank officials other than senior executives i.e. middle management level officials, etc who were/are complicit in bank sharp practice and collusion, etc.......we can bat and ball this until the cows come home........... but it will always come back to the facts..... which are that there are bank officials other than senior executives i.e. middle management level officials, etc who were/are complicit in bank sharp practice and collusion, etc.......

You are ranting in a vacuum of information. You wouldn't know a fact if it walked up to you singing the theme tune to the muppets.

Good riddance to the feckers I say

Comments