Home > Business > The Magazine

Wednesday 10 March 2010

A shock to Stanford's system

Allen Stanford, the Texan millionaire who English cricket leapt into bed with but is now expected to be indicted, has given a quite remarkable interview to ABC News. In it, he emotionally denies that he was running a ponzi scheme or laundering money for drug cartels. But it is this comment that caught my eye:

‘He was forced to fly on a commercial plane for the first time in almost two decades after the government seized his fleet of six private jets.
"They make you take your shoes off and everything, it's terrible," he complained about the airport security that apparently came as a surprise to him.’

One really does wonder how out of touch you have to be to not have heard that airport security got tightened up after 9/11. The more you hear about Stanford, the more foolish the ECB’s rush to partner with him seems.

Hat Tip: New York Magazine

More articles from: James Forsyth | this section

Print this article | Email to a friend | Permalink | Comments (7)

Post this entry to: del.icio.us | Digg | Newsvine | NowPublic | Reddit

Post comment

Verity

April 7th, 2009 12:54pm Report this comment

James - Wouldn't i>you rather be insulated from bossy, degrading airport security? What is wrong with being shocked by it?

The Preston Park Panther

April 7th, 2009 1:28pm Report this comment

There's a hell of a lot we need to be shocked by. Let's just start with speed (tax) cameras, and the Stalinist 4-hour re-education sessions offered (at a price of almost £80) to those supervillains who travel at 37mph and don't want to lose their licences. Did I die in the war so that these shits can treat us like this?

Wilhelm

April 7th, 2009 1:49pm Report this comment

Everyone should have a private jet. Public transport is hell on earth, loud people, screeeeming children, crying babies, mobile phone users who want to boast to the whole train or bus that they have a mobile phone, folk who smell.

I was on a train recently and I picked the quiet coach because I wanted to have a nap, the next coach along there was 6 or 7 football fans and it was like a chimps tea party, they didnt know how to behave, they werent house trained, they were barbarians and they were sober. The toilet was engaged so one of the halfwits screeeched '' I'll have to do the toilet out of the window .'' You get the drift.

I had to endure that torture for 3 hours and I left the train with my brain wasted. Next time I travel by train Im going first class, it doesnt matter the cost.

Hysteria

April 7th, 2009 2:16pm Report this comment

Wilhelm - I sympathise.

We tend not to get that kind of loutish behaviour over here...

but then again - we got the 2nd Amendment !

George Laird

April 7th, 2009 5:54pm Report this comment

Dear Wlhelm

I enjoyed your tale of discomfort among the great washed.

The best bit was when you had to sit for three hours under mental duress.

That made my day, thank you for sharing that story.

I come from a housing scheme and remember a tale of a person who was in need of toilet facilities on a double decker bus.

The person told me he was so desperate that he urinated at the front of the bus, needless to say the driver below wasn't a happy bunny.

When I enquired why he didn't get off the bus and find a quiet spot; I was told he didn't have enough bus fare.

Since you have stated you are going first class next time; I hope the yobs pay for an upgrade!

That way we can all enjoy future tales of your discomfort.

Yours sincerely

George Laird
The Campaign for Human Rights at Glasgow University

Bill (Scotland)

April 7th, 2009 10:39pm Report this comment

On the rare occasions I travel by train, I always go 'first'; it is quieter at least, although none of the catering trollies supplying one's 'free' refreshments appear ever to have heard of decaff. As for loos, at least in my part of the country, one is obliged to go through [sub-]standard class to visit the onboard lavatory - usually the water and/or the hand-dryer is not functioning and toilet paper is strewn everywhere on the 'moist' floor. Not attractive.

It bothers me not that Stamford has until now been unaware of the security precautions which now affect most air travellers; what does bother me though is the certainty that this same ignorance is shared by those in government, or others benefitting from 'VIP' service(as distinct from 'CIP', such as Stamford), who have so casually curtailed our liberties in so many ways, in the sure knowledge that they will be insulated from the effects of their policy edicts.

Verity

April 8th, 2009 3:38pm Report this comment

Bill from Scotland makes a good point. Does Jacqui Greedyboot have to take off her shoes, put her briefcase on the conveyor belt, have her purse rifled through and stand in a long queue, in her stocking feet, to be exrayed when she gets on a flight? Does Jack Straw? Does Harpic Harperson? Does Cameron? Indeed, does any MP?

How about the quangocrats? That Chakrabarti individual, for example? That Lady Warnecke or something who makes decisions about who can be born? How about that maestro of the text keyboard "Lord" Ahmad?

I wonder how many people are excused the degradation that the taxpayers have to go through - and not complain because otherwise the jobsworths will make life harder.

Bill (Scotland) makes a good point. The apparachiks have managed quietly to elevate themselves above the citizenry, at the same time making certain that the citizens understand that they are allowed to go about their business at the pleasure of the apparachiks.

The difference between our former democracy and the USSR is what, I wonder.

Post comment