Sean, It's wasn't a FAIL. It made me use an A TEAM metaphor, to me that's a GOLD STAR.

I just wanted to focus attention on the fact Ben so eloquently makes in his video that the Irish people did not borrow the money they are now being forced to pay back.

We need to explain to the world how that could be and how it has happened in other countries starting off with the U.S. and will happen to more and more countries. The fact is that Wall Street has figured out a way to borrow money, appropriate it for themselves and their friends and make taxpayers around the world pay it back.

The only thing I would change in Ben’s video is that the non-Irish banks did not “lose” the money they borrowed from Irish banks by gambling it away, they GAVE it to themselves and their friends by funding fake loans secured by fake assets here in the U.S. I watched these loans being created here in California and work their way to Wall Street and around the world.

THAT is what we must explain to people like the Irish who think they did something wrong. The corrupt Irish Government is actually telling the Irish people that their fiscal pain is the result of their own housing binge. It is not.

An Australian news team ran a story on Public Television in the U.S. last night saying exactly that. I used to like Aussies ….. But then Murdock is an Aussie.

I largely agree with you. Certainly about the urgent need for the law to catch up with reality.

As for bond versus cash you are quite correct. But I still think the banks are vulnerable, due to leverage, to even a few percent of their tier one capital holdings heading for the door. Not to mention the huge PR blow it would be. So as a piece of political theatre it still has a full set of sharp teeth with which to seriously harm the banks.

Looking ahead though, I am of your mind.

They seem to rely almost entirely on creating “bonds” based on various revenue streams such as car loans and credit card loans, just as they did in the hay-day of creating what they called mortgage-backed “securities”. In other words general “banking” seems to have gone through a complete transformation. It has gone from lending out our cash deposits (fractional-reserve banking) to creating “bonds”.

These “bonds” are whatever the banks say they are. The money in circulation is now largely comprised of these bank-created “bonds”. What we continue to think of as regulated banking has become mere fee-for-service business activity. We need a new legal definition of “banking”, particularly in Ireland where the term “bank guarantee” is legally challengeable.

(Excellent blog, Golem XIV. Your independent analysis is appreciated)

It's horrid to watch. But this isn't over. Not by a long way. Let's not count Ireland and the Irish out yet.

Let's talk about stunts. Banners and places to hang them from nearly always work. Let's talk about it shall we? Drop me an email if you like. Talk isn't illegal – yet.

Pat, if you got a job in the cosy world of government with the big boys would you mess with them?

Sean, yes things would be different but you missed the point of thinking about how do you get there. All these mad plans are super smashing great but it's the initiation of the plan. The grabbing bits of tube and welding set, the cutting of metal, the strapping of everyday things together until as G likes to say in his book BOOM! Out you fly of the old building in your makeshift evil doer justice machine smoking a cigar saying,

"I love it when a plan comes together".

Pat, I moved my bank out of my own ethics regardless of what Cantona said and why would I wait for a speacial day to do it? I thought it, asked advice and did it. BUT the bigger picture is the many acting as ONE.

The realisation that you CAN make a difference.

Once that is attained and fully appreciated, that is an unstoppable force that polititions will take note of.

But how 24K?

I don't know? hehe, tricky innt?

I got a guess though. If I look about my city I see three things other than cars and people.

Buildings, road signs and a s£$t load of ADVERTISING. and when I do foolishly look at the crocbox I see programmes and you guessed it ADVERTISING.

Adverts are short and to the point. Fathers for Justice were good at advertising as they had nothing to lose, maybe we still have stuff to lose? But the dudes at topshop got free advertising for couple of seconds without climbing.

So my guess is short and to the point hardcore advertising like my fav logo C"£$ Cola with stunts that get you/us/me on the telly. I personally think the rest is irrelevant other than what should be said, handed out and the most important for the sheep, the logo.

Or ten red hot dancers, all legs and top half banker suit dancing in sync with the band to one of my crazy banker songs in Canary Wharf
going viral.

I vote for the latter, but I'm a leg man.