@Skyewill,

I am just sharing my opinion. Not trying to win or lose. Unfortunately the only losers in this case will be the people of ANU. Not the ones living lavishly, Not the ones wiith the big house and big cars. The ones that will lose are the everyday hard working Antiguan. Sad but true. This scandal is above the both of us.

Notes From A Native Son Of The Rock! Thanks for cutting through the Dissonance.

Cognition, Organizational Awareness & Communications competencies have caused you to leave a clear Research Vapour Trail while flying steadily above the Rest who are being buffeted, up, down and every way in the turbulance and gloom of the Troposphere of Destruction.
Go Well! Much Respect!

Quote:
The Central Bank is now engaged in carrying out the legal and financial arrangements to bring a satisfactory closure to this matter

Quote:

Central Bank relinquishes control of ECAB By OBSERVER News - Monday, November 14th, 2011. – The Eastern Caribbean Central Bank (ECCB) has relinquished control of the Eastern Caribbean Amalgamated Bank (ECAB), formerly Bank of Antigua after more than two years. .. Some of the Bank’s assets were used by the Eastern Caribbean Amalgamated Bank (ECAB) which began operating in October 2010. ECAB comprises five of the largest regional banks across the currency union. In a notice in Saturday’s Daily OBSERVER newspaper, ECCB Deputy Governor Trevor Brathwaite stated that it had relinquished control of the bank effective November 11, 2011. The statement read: “The Central Bank shall relinquish control of the Bank and shall not continue to carry on the business of the bank where it has sold or otherwise disposed of the property, assets and undertakings of the Bank.” The official said this indicates a successful transition from the troubled entity to ECAB. It was further stated that a receiver would continue to manage and liquidate the remaining assets and liabilities of Bank of Antigua.

..

The company comprises representatives from the indigenous banking sector, namely Antigua Commercial Bank Ltd, East Caribbean Financial Holding Company Ltd, National Commercial Bank (SVG) Limited, National Bank of Dominica Ltd and St. Kitts-Nevis-Ang uilla National Bank Limited and, the Government of Antigua and Barbuda. • The Central Bank has been in regular contact with the United States Securities and Exchange Commission and Mr Ralph Janvey the US Receiver of the Stanford Estate. It should be noted that neither parties have challenged the legality or propriety of the Central Bank’s assumption of control of the Bank of Antigua in the circumstances described above. • The Bank of Antigua has been under the legal control of the Central Bank since 20 February 2009. Contrary to the alleged claims by the group, the Central Bank has not sold or otherwise disposed of the property, assets and undertaking of or any shareholding of the bank. The Central Bank has continued to support the institution while the management company continues to nurture the bank back to health under the direction of the Central Bank.

Quote:

• In order to avoid a financial crisis, the ECCB, on the direction of the Monetary Council and in accordance with its Emergency Powers, conferred on it by Part IIA , Article 5B of the ECCB Agreement 1983 set out as a schedule to the ECCB Act No 10 of 1983 of the laws of Antigua and Barbuda, assumed control of the Bank of Antigua on 20 February 2009. This is the classic role of a banking regulator or lender of last resort conferred on central banks from time immemorial. In recent times, in the current crisis this is a familiar occurrence in the United States where many financial institutions have been taken over by the regulatory authorities to prevent financial meltdown and to protect depositors and creditors. • The Central Bank in the circumstances provided liquidity support to the Bank of Antigua at significant cost to the Governments and people of the ECCU to prevent the failure of the Bank of Antigua and to protect the financial system against systemic threats. • A management company, Eastern Caribbean Amalgamated Financial Company Ltd was appointed to manage the Bank of Antigua on behalf of the Central Bank and return it to normalcy.

The run threatened the capacity of the Bank of Antigua to remain a viable entity and in the process put at risk the interest of depositors and creditors of the bank, the great majority of whom were citizens of Antigua and Barbuda.

• The possible failure of the Bank of Antigua also had the capacity to destabilize the banking and financial system in Antigua and Barbuda, and by extension that of the Eastern Caribbean Currency Union (ECCU) because of its participation in the clearing and settlement system.



• In order to avoid a financial crisis, the ECCB, on the direction of the Monetary Council and in accordance with its Emergency Powers, conferred on it by Part IIA , Article 5B of the ECCB Agreement 1983 set out as a schedule to the ECCB Act No 10 of 1983 of the laws of Antigua and Barbuda, assumed control of the Bank of Antigua on 20 February 2009.
• The possible failure of the Bank of Antigua also had the capacity to destabilize the banking and financial system in Antigua and Barbuda, and by extension that of the Eastern Caribbean Currency Union (ECCU) because of its participation in the clearing and settlement system.

Basseterre -- Feb. 18, 2010 -- It has been brought to the attention of the authorities that a group purporting to represent the interests of individuals who have been the alleged victims of financial malpractices by Allen Stanford have allegedly filed a class action suit in Dallas against the Bank of Antigua, Eastern Caribbean Central Bank, Antigua Commercial Bank Ltd, St. Kitts-Nevis-Ang uilla National Bank Ltd, East Caribbean Financial Holding Company Ltd, National Commercial Bank (SVG) Ltd, National Bank of Dominica Ltd and the Government of Antigua and Barbuda. Whatever the intentions of the group, the facts of relevance in this matter are the following: • The Bank of Antigua is an institution licensed under the Banking Act No. 14 of 2005 of the laws of Antigua and Barbuda. It is not an offshore bank and is therefore regulated by the Eastern Caribbean Central Bank (ECCB). • The Bank of Antigua suffered a classic bank run in the week beginning 16 February 2009 precipitated by the publication of negative statements regarding its lone shareholder,

The ECCB in turn parceled out ownership in the bank to the government of Antigua and to other Caribbean banks in what the investors called “a second act of brazen thievery.” The head of ECCB’s monetary council at the time was Antiguan Minister of Finance Errol Cort, who was both King’s supervisor and one of Stanford’s personal attorneys, according to court papers.

OK you win! We do it your way ok, You the new boss and as soon as you send down the directives we will have the US fall in line ok! Thanks for sharing!

Did some one say that Stanford had billions in receivables? If he had then it was from his other companies that he simply threw tens and hundred of millions of dollars in. How big is the receivable from C/bbean Star where 300 million was spent? Zero!

Stanford, in addition to being a ** (with big help from Davis) is probably the WORST businessman in the history of the world. How else can you explain a man spending 7 billion dollars over two decades and all he has to show for it is some nice buildings and pretty flowers? How does POTENTIAL income from 20/20 and Islands Club justify blowing 7 Billion of OTHER PEOPLE'S MONEY and lying to them for 20 years?

@Skyewill,

you can certainly seperate the people from the government. Jail the government for their actions. I don't believe the investors should get anything back. Show me where it said on the certificate of depsoit that they were guranteed by the land in antigua or the antiguan government. Please do then my stance will change.

@Kickbob,

I will say it again. These investors got greedy and now they blame everyone but themselves. If you make them whole, they will just do it again. Like the Have Mercy wrote you can get 12-36% in a cd in a South American bank. Well above equity returns. When the lose thier mony they will blame that government.

Unfortunately you can’t separate the people from the government. This is why it is so important to choose decent people for your government. You actually prove a point in Stanford favor: It is a well know fact that offshore investments are higher risk and therefore they took the risk and lost. However I still don’t believe the truth or the real story has been told. Stanford problem was he personally held all of the corporations. The truth is Stanford had billions of returns/receiva bles. He led in 20/20 and was in the middle of signing billions in television contracts in Britain and other countries. His two island club idea would have blown up the upscale market and put ANU on the map comparing us to Monaco. Those CD’s was secured by the Properties and other investments that interrelated to include the cricket grounds and the restaurant and spa and 2 islands they said he would never own. Somebody convinced a judge that Stanford was broke but the billions were sitting right in our face. (Just my opinion) I believe Stanford was blackmailed. Ponzi’s do not have hundreds of employees or real companies doing real business. This thing is not over.

Godson, they will not admit that its impossible to find insured (Eg. FDIC) CD's that offer anything close to the yield Stanford was offering. Of course there was risk, that's why the interest rate was higher than for example a US CD

@ Lord Have Mercy,

Would you invest your mony in a CD when promised 12-36%. Would you think that is safe. It beats the reurn on the S&P, the Dow, the Russell 2000, ect. Those returns are far above any major world index.

There is a reson the 10 year US Treasury is paying 2%. It's called saftey. You know the US government is not going out of business and you will get your money back. For that saftey and piece of mind you get a lower intrest than investing in South America.

Yes it Greed that got thise investors in trouble. It's always greed. That's why this ponzi scheme happened and that's why there will be many more.

@Lord Have Mercy,

Point well taken. Then you go put your money in these South American and Caribean Banks. When you are getting those types of returns(equity like) then the risk you take are exponentially greater. Inlflation risk, political risk, risk of capital. There is a reason you don't only see those tyes of reutns on cds in 3rd world countries. Anyone who promise you whse types of return on a fixed product without some subsatnicial risk, call theem liar and run with your money.

And yes I am mad. These investors want the poeople of ANU to suffer for their greed. ANU government and Stanford benefited from this scheme and they should go to jail but the peolpe(every day person) should not pay for the investors' greed. These investors blame everyone but themselves.

where did the last judge said the plans were hatched and executed?

Sure, investors are aware of the risks of investing, yet there's something different here. The government(s) were complicit in deceiving investors, thus creating a whole different level of risk.

And if Antigua has nothing to hide and is serious about going after criminals then why hasn't Mr. King been extradited to face the charges against him?

Antigua is nothing more than a pirate state with nothing to offer the m** or the international community. It would good if England took steps to recolonize and bring some sense of respectability to the place.

It seems to me that the idea of the investors that Stanford swindled suing antigua is rubbing you the wrong way. Antigua is getting sued because it conspired with Stanford to rob these investors. It is not a matter of shifting any blame, Antigua is culpable. Think of it like this, Stanford was the muscle and Antigua was the get away driver. The are both equally responsible for the crimes against these investors under the legal theory of ENTERPRISE LIABILITY.

You are mistaken, greed was not really the motivating factor for these investors and the interest rate offered by Stanford was not unusually high for the region. Because interest rates on loans in South America are extremely high (12% - 36%), it is normal to receive between 7'% - 9% on a Cetrificate of Deposit. Banco Santander and Grupo Aval are just two of the reputable banks that you can get those rates from even today when interest rates in the US is between 1% - 2%.

I agree, this type of fraud on this level doen't happen without government help.

Antigua is a Constitutional Monarchy where there Prime Minister has much more power than any president in this world ... his sweeping power is on the level of a pharoh. That means that all of the ministers have to remain in the good graces of the Prime Minister or he or she receive the "Chandlah Treatment".

All of the cooked investors that come to Antigua know that they need to get friendly with the "Monarch" because any little power that the tissue paper ministers may have is a favour that continues at the pleasure of the monarch. The office of the PM is covetted by all of his seemingly loyal ministers.

Campaign Contributions is the grease that turns the wheels of government. Politicians have constituency branches to run and constituents that always have genuine needs, and that requires money. If you want to know who are the ones making the campaign contributions just FOLLOW THE MONEY ... LOOK FOR THE PEOPLE WHO GET GOVERNMENT CONTRACTS.

I see your perspective very clearly and I always respect your views. I agree that in most regards our politicians are a bunch of incompetents, but I want you to look at this one again, because each politician in Antigua is as clueless as a fox.

What is the most telling is that both the ALP and the UPP governments created an environment at the FSRC where it was difficult to impossible for the SEC to uncover Sir Allen's Ponzi Scheme. If that is not participating in the criminal conspiracy to defraud investors, I do not know what is. It they did not know what was going on how did they know to help Stanford to cover his tracks

Further, all of the ALP "Political Appointees" were removed from office when the UPP took over the government, except for Leroy King, who has special ties to Dr Caught, whose sister-in-law was elevated from a teller position in a bank to a manager level position at the FSRC.

Need I say more ...

Again, my belief is that there are those in this government who should be charged for letting this ponzi scheme go on but for the investors to sue the ANU government is just shifiting blame. The investors need to first blame themselves for being greedy.

Somene promised you something unreasonable and you got greedy and took the bait. Remember if you are foolish with your money and you don't understand the laws of mony then it's not yours to keep.

There was no way that someone could offer you 8% in a CD when current rates are 3% at best. That was an indication that something was wrong. You should have ran. Stanford investors, please stop blaming eveyone else and blame yourselves for your greed.

On another note, Antigua, if you think what Stanford did was wrong and impactfull to your ecomomy wait till you see what happens if you keep turning your heads to what the Chineese government is doing to you.

This would be a fine occasion for the "Joint Liquidators" to come forward and, like Janvey in the US, expose politicians who received "contributions" (it was already determined in a US court that there is no such thing as bribery under Antiguan law), publish all loans, grants, and gifts to the GOAB, explain the disposition of the property in the SIB building and Pavillion restaurant, and file civil charges against Sir Allen's lawyers and accountants.

Or they can continue to appear as high-priced lap dogs.

It’s like saying to the US what Stanford did is only wrong in your eyes. As far as we are concern he did only good things.

Based on their behavior over the last three years, that's EXACTLY what the GOAB is saying. No investigation, no charges, no trials, expropreation od assets (airport land and Bank of Antigua, so far) and the continued refusal to honour the extradition treaty regarding Leroy King. Actions speak louder than words. This goes right to the top.

And what about the audit firm of Hewlett. Nothing is done in Antigua. Everything is fine in paradise. All we did was to huff up everything. Appointing expensive receivers who do nothing more than sell all his high value assets at rock bottom prices that are barely enough to pay their enormous fees. It’s like saying to the US what Stanford did is only wrong in your eyes. As far as we are concern he did only good things. We the government haven’t even produced financials for over eight years. We cannot even account for a music festival.

I guess our Attorney General and the Minister of Finance didn't see this one coming. They cannot think outside the box. They should have never let the Chairperson of the FSRC and the Banking Regulator go and give testimony in a US court in this case. Who was their US attorney that advised them so to do? Anything they said will now be used against us. How small our brains are when we cannot see how we really have incriminated ourselves. And still to date no charges has been brought against Mr. King in Antigua. All we need is to request the evidence from the US. He should be trailed according to our law if he is alleged to have aided Stanford in his Ponzi scheme. At least it deserves a criminal investigation. And the same goes for Stanford. No charges are made against him either. And as the bank was in our jurisdiction, Gil Lopez and Mark Kuhrt should also be held accountable in Antigua.

You are giving the Antiguan politicians much more credit than they deserve. The fact is only one person in Antigua knew what Stanford was really up to in regards to the Ponzi scheme - that person calls himself the "Analyst' and used to call in on Winston Derrick's Voice of the people program regularly and was ridiculed for insisting that Stanford had no money. He was right.
Our politicians are not that savvy or sophisticated and besides even the US financial regulators and federal law enforcement were in the dark concerning Stanford dealings. Stanford employed former SEC and FDIC officials to assist him in navigating the intricate web of financial regulation. The US govt did suspect he was laundering money - but no one except a few top executives (most are now in jail) knew the extent to which he was stealing from investors. Yes they did take money from Stanford (as they do from every business person ) but it doesn't make them complicit - just clueless as we the electorate knew all along.

Ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha....Oh bouy LMAO down with the evil empire....HA HA HA well, well, well. Since we can't read between the lines pleas help us and tell us what your crystal ball say.

is the CARIBBEAN TIMEBOMB about to EXPLODE all over its CORRUPT POLITICIANS?

Since these guys are obviously out for blood and RIGHTFULLY so, Antigua cannot go to jail, so who will be the sacrificial lamb that will be led to the "20 years" slaughter?

We have an interesting case here, where there are politicians on both sides of the political divide that knowingly benefitted from Sir Allen's Criminal Activities. The even gave him a knighthood for how well he took care of them.

Those that took stanford's money and turned a blind eye on what he was doing can be legally deemed part and parcel of the criminal conspiracy to defraud investors.

In loving memory of Winston Derrick and LUMP, it would be nice to see them get jail on this one for all the other things they have done.

I always warned some of my peeps in Antigua about the way how the Antigua Government always seems to go for the foreign shady investors out of the thousands of potentially clean investors.

It always bewails me that Antigua seems to always attract strange and shady bedfellows from since 1970 up to present. (do the history yourself don't take my word for it..Safarti's, Medellin Cartel, Dato Tan and many more before and after)

Well my warning was that "One day, you are going to wake up to a rap at your door and there will be a well attired man standing in the door way, telling you that the draws you are wearing and YOU belongs to him and he wants his property!" then what are you going to when you look across to your neighbor for help when the same is happening there.

Antigua and Antiguans need to stop, smell the coffee and start going to bed with proper and accountable bedfellows.

I recently explained that US Federal law relating to vicarious liability was broad enough to cover politicians in Antigua. Today I am greeted with:

"A February 15 complaint filed in a Dallas Federal court said “Antigua knowingly provided necessary assistance to Stanford’s $7 billion Ponzi scheme and, in exchange, received millions of dollars in loans whose repayment terms Stanford did not enforce. … For well over a decade, Antigua was a prime participant in, and beneficiary of, the Stanford Ponzi scheme, and actively protected and shielded Stanford’s criminal enterprise from real regulatory scrutiny.’’

Local elected officials were labelled “Stanford’s partners in crime”.

Let him who is without sin cast the first stone ... Both ALP and UPP politicians received "campaign contributions" for aiding & abetting Sir Allen Stanford in what they knew or should have known was a criminal enterprise.

Let me remind the politicians, including the leader of the opposition that it matters not what they did with what the plaintiffs are calling "BRIBE MONEY"
The wrongdoing is in accepting what truly amounts to a bribe.

Bank of Antigua had nothing to do with the offshore banking. They were separate and apart. People on all sides have been impacted by the Stanford matter. This is the victims way of trying to not be affected, by going after the only thing they think they can. Bank of Antigua was a domestic bank, regulated by the ECCB, not Stanford. One would have to tell me he was influencing someone at ECCB of this to carry any weight. What the "Investors" need to understand, is that this is an unfortunate event, many people have lost, and will not recover their losses. They had a choice to invest their money in the US and chose Stanford offshore instead, why ? when you take a chance there is risk of loss, don't put all your eggs in one basket. Many Antiguan's directly or indirectly have lost their jobs, their homes and any savings they may have been able to put up. Lets try pick up the pieces and move on. Trying to find someone to make pay for the damage done is just more injustice, and unnecessary money spent on trying to blame.

Rember that Gaston said that Stanford was the best thing since slice bread.

Roman empire no longer exist and USA will eventually fall. People need to learn to read between the line.

He should be. it' a long time coming. And for those who want Antigua to pirate US copy rights. You could not live through the bararge of law suites that would happen. lucky for Antigua that ponzi and stealing is legal for rich people and only poor people go to jail. You see all thay crime and ponzi no one in Antigua have been arrested, not one charged.

Stanford still biting us in the backside and we choosing to jump from the frying pan into the fire by moving on from the Stanford debacle straight into economic citizenship. One grand scheme into another. When will we learn to use our common sense?

This is certain to make things uncomfortable for the "Joint Liquidators". While they're free to associate themselves with whomever they want, I doubt the Worldwide Partners are none too pleased that their associates are in the position of holding off investigations into worldwide fraud.

I bet Justin is "Not Ready" for this !