JOHN KERRY OWNS At Least A Half Million Dollars Of Strip Search SCANNER STOCK

[Segami]

:smoke::smoke::grr::grr:

:wtf:



<>



"..According to a Center for Responsive Politics review of the most recent personal financial disclosure filings, eight members of Congress -- three Democrats and five Republicans -- owned at least $2,000 worth of stock in L-3 Communications, which is one of the two main contractors involved in the full-body scanning machines.


Sen. John Kerry (D-Mass.) disclosed possessing the most stock in L-3 Communications -- with a minimum investment of at least $500,000 and a maximum value of $1 million. The L-3 Communications stock is fully owned by his wife, Teresa Heinz, according to federal financial disclosure reports.


Members of Congress file annual personal financial disclosures detailing their assets and liabilities, as well as those of their spouses and dependent children. These forms also allow lawmakers to describe the value of their holdings and debts in broad ranges, so it's impossible to know exactly how much the holdings of Kerry's family, or any other lawmaker's household, are worth.


Republican Reps. Michael Castle (R-Del.) and Michael McCaul (R-Texas) both disclosed possessing between $16,002 and $65,000 worth of L-3 Communications stock in 2009.


And Rep. Judy Biggert (R-Ill.) was the member of Congress with the next most valuable holdings in L-3 Communications, worth between $15,001 and $50,000.


Here is a table of all eight lawmakers whose 2009 personal financial disclosure forms, which were filed in May, noted holdings in L-3 Communications, along with the minimum and maximum value of these holdings, according to the Center's research.


Name.............................................Value

Sen. John Kerry (D-Mass.).............$500,001 to $1,000,000

Rep. Michael Castle (R-Del)...........$16,002 to $65,000

Rep. Michael McCaul (R-Texas)......$16,002 to $65,000

Rep. Judy Biggert (R-Ill.).................$15,001 to $50,000

Rep. Ron Klein (D-Fla.)...................$1,001 to $15,000

Rep. Robert Scott (D-Va.)...............$1,001 to $15,000

Sen. Jon Kyl (R-Ariz.)......................$2,173

Rep. Kenny Marchant (R-Texas).......$2,086



cont'

<http://www.opensecrets.org/news/2010/11/several-federal-lawmakers-invested.html>

[jaxx]

1. And the point is?

[sabrina 1]

31. Have you ever heard of 'Conflict of Interest'?

And now we know for sure, not that there was ever any doubt, these scanners are about profits, not security The American people have been mere guinea pigs in the experiment of 'how much money can the wealthy elite make from the fear-mongering surrounding 9/11, before people wake up and realize that security is the least concern of our elected officials'.

They've made a fortune. It's been quite a gravy train, this 'terror' business. Thousands of troops have died, but the MIC is rolling in money for corrupt contractors and politicians and Corporations, and fear-profiteers like Giuliani and Chertoff. And all the American people get is to lose even more of their rights.

Kerry should be ashamed of himself, profiting from fear. Blood money. No politician who has any say in policies that have the potential to enrich themselves and others, should be legally allowed to profit from those policies. I wonder, was he against these scanners back in 2004 before he was for them, after Democrats were elected. And did he have inside information that Democrats were about to betray their supporters yet again, for money?

Disgusting, all of it ~

[ProSense]

42. Bullshit

There is no conflict of interest. Teresa Heinz has a trust and no control over where the money is invested. There is no conflict of interest, not now, not when he ran for President.

[sarcasmo]

47. Chertoff running the company is not a conflict of interest?

[ProSense]

48. Explain the conflict of interest

Go ahead. Explain how a blind trust belonging to his wife is a conflict of interest.

Most people just talk and have no idea what they're talking about.

[sarcasmo]

50. Chertoff was head of Homeland Security leaves and runs a company that sells directly back to his old

Employer the US Government, how is this not conflict of interest? I don't care about Kerry's money his wife and her money control him. Corrupt the motivation for an act in the other.


A conflict of interest (COI) occurs when an individual or organization is involved in multiple interests, one of which could possibly corrupt the motivation for an act in the other.

[ProSense]

51. You're talking about Chertoff

Where is the conflict of interest regarding Kerry?

"I don't care about Kerry's money his wife and her money control him."

Where?

[Wind Dancer]

57. Of course there IS a conflict of interest.

Your denial of that fact speaks volumes but is also quite typical of your usual responses. :eyes:

[ProSense]

58. Explain it.

Challenge, no rolls eyes. Explain it.

[tpsbmam]

74. Simple.

Legislators who vote on using these things AND who have a personal financial interest in them being sold and used have a conflict of interest. Vote for their use & enrich themselves. Conflict of interest. Are these things really in the best interest of the American people? I think not and I don't trust anyone with a personal vested interest in the companies that sell the machines to tell me they're just fine for US (but not them, since you can be damn sure they don't get scanned) to go through them.

HUGE conflict of interest!

[asdjrocky]

63. This is the single funniest thing you've ever writen.

And that is indeed saying a lot.

[glitch]

46. This moves beyond conflict of interest and well into corruption.

Investing in a company and then legislating that taxpayers to buy its products? This is worse than insider trading. On par with something a Bush or a Cheney would do.

:thumbsdown:

[greytdemocrat]

44. Exactly

L-3 does more than just scanners. Jeeze.

[blondeatlast]

2. Looks like my investment in popcorn futures will serve me well right now... nt

[leftstreet]

3. Wow Senator Kyle is sure cheap n/t

[jillan]

4. Lol...

[cherokeeprogressive]

5. The D behind his name makes it ALLLLL alright. Surely you've been here long enough to know that.

I can think of a hundred, nay, a THOUSAND instances where some hypocrisy can be not only explained but excused because of the D, and the number seems to grow every day.

[jaxx]

7. You made me laugh.

Now, coherently, what's the point?

[cherokeeprogressive]

9. You would ask that wouldn't you.

1500mg of Vicodin and a couple glasses of White Zin guarantees that I'm not quite sure what the point was supposed to be other than that everybody has their hand in the cookie jar but Yours Truly and dammit, I'm getting more than a little jealous.

I'm afraid that's as coherent as I can be at the moment.

Happy Friday after Genocide Celebration Day!

[jaxx]

10. Take care and watch mixing those two things.

[Yurovsky]

27. What are you supposed to wash painkillers down with?

H2O? With all the toxins in most community sourced tap water?

I'd take my chances with wine. Or maybe good bourbon. And who doesn't like a good Sierra Nevada Pale Ale?

[Major Hogwash]

33. I'll bet the "D" in "DU" stands for something, too.

I can think of a hundred, no a THOUSAND reasons why Kerry is a damn good Democrat.

[woo me with science]

55. +10000000000000000000000

The hypocrisy around here is growing from a rank odor to a stench.

:puke:

[Arkana]

62. You're right, we should primary that fucker.

Then maybe we could get a Scott Brown clone to replace him! That'd show those Dummycrats! Right? High five!

[treestar]

6. After 911 security would be one area a smart investor would look into, no?

[MattSh]

28. Or rather, the illusion of security.

Because that's what 90% of the so-called security measures are. Security Theater.

[treestar]

37. Perhaps

I recall in the months after 911 seeing articles about campus security (escorts for girls at night on campus) and thinking WTH does that have to do with terrorism? Everyone who possibly could was trying to cash in using it. The word "security" was all it took.

[de novo]

53. "Security Theater" and "Fear Mongering" are smart investments.

We are a nation of cowards, led by merchants of fear and perpetual war.

[bluestate10]

8. L-3 is a technology company that does a lot more than build body scanners.

The company is at the forefront of communications and medical technology. Maybe people brought stock because of that. I may indirectly hold L-3 stock. If I do, I have no intention of kicking myself, have have some knowledge of the company and it's products.

John Kerry is the democratic senator from my home state. I am disappointed with him, most recently for buying a 7 million dollar, New Zealand built yacht when he could have either invested the 7 million in small businesses in my state, or at least had a USA based yacht build his boat. I don't want to see a republican take his seat, but would love to see a real, working class democrat or even a real, wealthy democrat defeat Kerry in the democratic primary. Kerry is way too self centered and too interested in enjoying his enormous wealth, he is not one of use, even the wealthier of us. I remember a fiasco a while back where he allowed a Boston street to be blocked off so that he could build a wine cellar for his home. How incredibly tone deaf.

[Scruffy1]

21. He also registered his yacht in another state to avoid taxes

[hughee99]

32. In defense of Kerry,

his yacht (designed by a US firm, but built in New Zealand) is actually owned by a corporation (Great Point LLC) which seems to be a holding company (for tax purposes, perhaps), and... wait, I'm not helping his case any, am I.

[Little Star]

49. Yes he docked his boat in RI to avoid $500,000 in taxes.

Then when caught with his "mistake" he payed up.

He is certainly a Dem but he is also part of the powers that be. No different than a rich republican when it comes to gaining more and more wealth on the back of us peons.

Being a MA resident I use to really like and trust Kerry, no more. I simply don't trust him anymore.

He may fool a lot of people by hiding behind THK's trust. I'm not buying anymore.

JMHO

[Segami]

52. " Then when caught with his "mistake" he payed up.." If he wasn't caught, would Kerry have freely

paid up? I doubt it. Anyone who continues to believe such political slight-of-hand illusions are smokin some pretty good organics. You are correct, he is a Dem in name only but definitely belongs to the PTB exclusive rich club house. He does whats best for Kerry and his social/political position.

[ProSense]

54. "You are correct, he is a Dem in name only "

Yeah, one of the most progressive Democrats in the Senate is a "Dem in name only"

There is a level of desperation reached here. It's apparent the anti-Obama/Democratic Party faction is realizing that the BS isn't working, and are getting more desperate.

[Little Star]

66. pffftttt

[politicasista]

84. +1 n/t

[politicasista]

86. You can always have Bob Corker and Lamar Alexander, and Teabaggers

but keep Porno Brown, unless you and MA want another just like him. :rofl: :rofl: :rofl:

[politicasista]

87. Wanna trade Senators?

You can always have Lamar Alexander and Bob Corker, but keep Porno Brown since he is a "man of the people" and elect someone just like him. Really.

You can also have the racist, xenophoic Teabaggers and a GOP governor.



Just sayin.

[MisterP]

11. a few years ago he was reported here as the biggest military investor

in the Senate Dems (though trailing several Senate Repubs)

[Mimosa]

12. OMG. A link between Chertoff, Kerry and BFEE. ICK!

Mr. P, I recall that.


I'm looking forward to reading the 'if he's a D it's OK' excuses.

Isn't Kerry RICH ENOUGH already? :(

Excerpt from OP link:



"..According to a Center for Responsive Politics review of the most recent personal financial disclosure filings, eight members of Congress -- three Democrats and five Republicans -- owned at least $2,000 worth of stock in L-3 Communications, which is one of the two main contractors involved in the full-body scanning machines.


Sen. John Kerry (D-Mass.) disclosed possessing the most stock in L-3 Communications -- with a minimum investment of at least $500,000 and a maximum value of $1 million. The L-3 Communications stock is fully owned by his wife, Teresa Heinz, according to federal financial disclosure reports.

[Subdivisions]

13. I'm sick of these motherfuckers! It's the same goddamned circle of

elitists every fucking time!

[ChimpersMcSmirkers]

18. LOL! Quelle surprise!

[Desertrose]

25. Yup. I wonder when will people get that it's not about left or right, but...

about the top moneyed percentage.

They want to make sure they will have their assets protected and screw the everyone else in the process. We are the expendable worker bees. And just like the bee population disappearing...so has the *middle* class.

Wake up for once, people!

[Little Star]

56. Yep. I too wish people would really wake up.

It is a class war and we are not winning.

When it comes to money and power both Dem & Repug Pols are in it for themselves, not us.

[MisterP]

59. a correction: that IS about left and right--it's just that "Dem" has been conflated with "left"

because they're RELATIVELY to the left; on objective policy measures the two parties average at -0.7 and -0.9 of a scale where 1 is furthest left and -1 furthest right

so it IS about left vs. right, just that there are many elites and economic conservatives who blackmail voters into having no choice but to elect them by having a few liberal/left social positions. that's exactly why Dem politicians can espouse any far-right policy they like: because voters will % rationalize their support as the only way to get progress done; % figure that if the further conservatives are on the attack, the candidate/policy must be terrific--and besides, what choice do they have?; and % figure that if the candidate is of the formerly-liberal party there has to be something there that can redeem their vicious cheerleading of the murder of 2 million Middle Easterners

[Subdivisions]

14. dupe. n/t

[madinmaryland]

15. "The L-3 Communications stock is fully owned by his wife, Teresa Heinz"

This is his second wife. In which case, they would probably have separate finances.

John Kerry DOES NOT OWN the stocks.

Read it, my friends.

[HipChick]

16. I doubt them even do their own investing

[RufusTFirefly]

17. Go for it. If you don't have a heart -- and you have good PR -- you can make a fortune! n/t

[Catherina]

19. And we wonder why things are so fucked up n/t

[Tejas]

20. Republican Senator Kay Bailey Hutchison

An early TSA contractor for full-body scanners was the American Science and Engineering company. AS&E's lobbying team is impressive, including Tom Blank, a former deputy administrator for the TSA. Fellow AS&E lobbyist Chad Wolf was an assistant administrator at TSA and an aide to Sen. Kay Bailey Hutchison, who sits on the Transportation and Defense subcommittees of Appropriations.


http://www.zimbio.com/Full-Body+Scanners/articles/Q--5wTI6zaF/Brother+Lobby+Republican+Insider+Promoting

[Renew Deal]

22. I don't think porno scanners are even close to the primary business for L3.

Aren't they a networking company?

[TheKentuckian]

23. Stock or no, he should advocate banning this nonsense and back it with leadership and a vote

because that is who I was sold all my life John Kerry was.

[pnwmom]

35. Why should the radio scanner pictured be banned?

It doesn't use backscatter radiation or any radiation, for that matter.

[TheKentuckian]

45. If you wouldn't accept a strip search then a machine that does one is also unacceptable

A machine does not change the intent.

Radiation is an entirely separate concern than the right to be secure in one's person and property against unreasonable search and seizure.

If you have reason to suspect me of a crime then get a fucking warrant, if not then we are operating a police state. Everyone cannot be suspect under our system of law if it is not perverted and twisted completely out of shape.

[pnwmom]

68. I disagree. This is not the same as a strip search.

The person viewing the images is in a separate room and the image of the face is blurred so that your identity is unknown.

Yes, there is an ability to see under your clothes -- but the viewer can't see your face or know who you are. This is entirely different from a strip search.

[TheKentuckian]

70. The method is the only difference the intent is the same.

[pnwmom]

71. The different method is what makes this NOT a strip search.

The purpose is the same -- to reduce the chance that a terrorist or a violently disturbed individual could bring a weapon onto a plane.

[TheKentuckian]

72. No, the purpose is to strip search every passenger and the method is electronic

rather than a person in the room.

This is a method to perform a strip search, everything else is convoluted justification.

The machines allow strip searches to be quicker and to be perceived as less invasive though it simply uses high tech "eyes" to do it.

This is like mail versus a fax both allow you to transmit information, one does it in a physical medium the other electronic but the exact same information is sent from one person to another.

[pnwmom]

73. No one is stripped. The purpose is to identify possible weapons. n/t

[TheKentuckian]

75. If you go through the machine it is a strip search. Justify it you like

Rollover and supposedly someone will keep your cowering ass "safe" but apparently it isn't all that crucial because on the busiest day of the year the strip search machines were powered down.

Safety first!

Baaahhhhhh

Lie down in your green pastures and use your brain power to justify what you wouldn't tolerate in a different package.
Surrender your freedom and that of your children in a silly reflex to the boogieman and on the word of power mongers and liars.

[pnwmom]

77. An x-ray isn't a strip search and neither is this.

Neither the x-ray type nor the radio wave type.

The essence of a strip search, according to any commonly used definition, is making the subject remove clothing. No clothing is removed in these scans, hence, no strip search occurs.

http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&rlz=1G1GGLQ_ENUS374&defl=en&q=define:strip+search&sa=X&ei=eAjzTL3QPJLCsAPshO3NCw&ved=0CBwQkAE

"Definitions of strip search on the Web:

search (someone) for weapons or drugs by having the person remove their clothes; "He was strip-searched at the airport"
wordnetweb.princeton.edu/perl/webwn

A strip search is the stripping (removal of clothing, search of persons and/or personal effects) of a person to check for weapons or other contraband.
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Strip_search

[TheKentuckian]

78. What the hell do you think the machine does?

No need to take of your clothes if they can use a machine to see through them.

You are hanging on for dear life on a distinction with no difference.

It is a different technique to reach the same objective. If this equipment existed when the Bill of Rights was written, it would certainly be prohibited without a warrant.

You have given an exact definition of what the machines do and their purpose and are hung up on if you actually undress or a device sees through your clothes.

A distinction without a difference.

[pnwmom]

79. You are stretching the meaning of "strip" beyond all normal usage. n/t

[TheKentuckian]

81. You are using a new technique to justify a practice you would not otherwise approve of

Baaaaaahhhhhhhhhh

Read your own definition, ignore the technique, and you have little choice but to see how I do.

[pnwmom]

82. The technique is what most people object to.

Not most DUers, perhaps, but most Americans.

[MrSlayer]

24. Why? Because that's where money is going to be made.

You don't really think he's above being ahead of the game? Do you?

[alittlelark]

26. Since he is worth 700 mill or so it sounds paltry.

My sister once made fun of me for having $18,000 in a checking account.

We were starting up a business and needed large amts quickly.

It's all a matter of perspective.

[Obamanaut]

29. He was against them before he was for them. nt

[johnaries]

30. Oh, boy. Now we get a lot of Kerry-bashing posts.

I guess it's open-season on all Democrats at Democratic Underground. Whodathunkit. Meanwhile, Republicans destroy democracy while we eat our own.

[ProSense]

43. People are desperate to make this TSA

issue into something bigger than it is. Most people recognize the issues with the pat downs, but beyond that no one really gives a damn. So those who want it to be a huge scandal are trying to imply Obama went to India with the owner of one company, Kerry's wife has a trust that owns stock in one company, TSA employees are child molesters and rapists. It's beyond ridiculous.

[politicasista]

83. So now he corrupt or something?

MA can always trade senators. Keep Porno Brown, but you can have Corker and Alexander. You can have the Tea Party, and new Congress critters, one who's aide sent a spook-eyed e-mail of Obama, the other dodged child support payments and abused his first wife. You can always have our newly GOP elected Gov. :sarcasm:

Nah. The Senator better stay put up there. It's blue. Too much ignorance, even if MA doesn't appreciate him anyway.

[pnwmom]

34. He's smart enough to own stock in the better scanner co.

The scanner pictured is the one that uses safer radio waves rather than backscatter radiation.

[lillypaddle]

36. So what?

With the kind of money Kerry has to invest, do you really think he PERSONALLY chooses what stock is in his portfolio? C'mon. He has an investment advisor or team whom he puts in charge of these decisions, I'm sure.

[Hannah Bell]

38. well, no problem then. so long as he doesn't know.

[Segami]

40. Yea sure, ah ha, he doesn't know? HIS wife owns the company.

[mdmc]

39. what doesn't he own a half mil of?

[undeterred]

41. And he can afford to run for president again.

Not that he should or would, but that's how you get to be president.

[upi402]

60. Twety spit venom on a woman who alleged this crap

MSNBC needs to replace him. I turn it off when I see his face now. She was right and he will NEVER admit it. Tweety is such a tingle-leg neocon sycophant.

[asdjrocky]

61. How can anyone be suprised by this shit?

Before 9/11 "Homeland Security" wasn't even a term, now it makes more money than Hollywood and the music industry put together. It's a club we're just not in.

[TheWebHead]

64. well L-3 is a pretty diversified defense company

ASEI or OSI Systems would be the more pure plays on the scanners. If it's any consolation, LLL has been a terrible stock to own this year. But whatever the case, I have no problem with the scanners.

[tammywammy]

65. He doesn't own ANY L3 stock

It says it right there in the damn article. His WIFE owns it and I thought we all learned back in the 2004 race that they keep things separate.

"The L-3 Communications stock is fully owned by his wife, Teresa Heinz, according to federal financial disclosure reports."


At least headlines and links like this prove on DU who actually reads the story and who goes off just the OP.

[Segami]

67. Can you explain exactly what does Kerry and others ' Own, Possess or Hold ' in L3 Communications?

".....eight members of Congress -- three Democrats and five Republicans -- OWNED at least $2,000 worth of stock in L-3 Communications,...


.....Sen. John Kerry (D-Mass.) disclosed POSSESSING the most stock in L-3 Communications -- with a minimum investment of at least $500,000 and a maximum value of $1 million....


....Republican Reps. Michael Castle (R-Del.) and Michael McCaul (R-Texas) both disclosed POSSESSING between $16,002 and $65,000 worth of L-3 Communications stock in 2009.


And Rep. Judy Biggert (R-Ill.) was the member of Congress with the next most valuable HOLDINGS in L-3 Communications, worth between $15,001 and $50,000......"


.

[pnwmom]

69. That's because the forms lump spousal holdings together

with the holdings of Senators/Representatives.

[RB TexLa]

76. It says his wife owns the stock. It says he doesn't own any of the stock.

[cbdo2007]

80. I doubt he even picks which companies he owns stock in. Most people with millions of dollars

pay stock advisors who make 99.9% of their investment decisions for them.

Trust me, Senator Kerry doesn't have time to be sitting around checking companies annual reports, etc for the hundreds of companies he's probably invested in. Even if he is, the majority of people who pick their own stocks do worse than the DJIA or the S&P, so they would be smarter to just buy an ETF of one of those.

[Bluebear]

85. lol