Register for free to join our community of investors and share your ideas. You will also get access to streaming quotes, interactive charts, trades, portfolio, live options flow and more tools.
Register for free to join our community of investors and share your ideas. You will also get access to streaming quotes, interactive charts, trades, portfolio, live options flow and more tools.
I freely disagree...
A gasoline boycott is already underway.
A national work stoppage is also being organized. If only ten million people took a week off work to make the point of the power of the people over the power of corruption the stock markets would tank, and the message would be heard around the world, even the terrorists would stop for a while and pay attention to the democratic process.
It doesn't take a petition, it takes people with guts to confront those that control of the nuclear destiny of this planet.
Voting him out of office is riskier than the impeachment process, enough people need to step up to the plate and pressure the Judiciary Committee to start the impeachment process, that way both sides win, the Republicons can find replacements for Bush and Cheney who both need impeachment, and the Demoncrats will need to get a better running mate for Kerry if he gets the ticket.
The following is an open letter to Rep. Darrell Issa (R-CA), who led the charge to recall Gov. Gray Davis and personally financed the bulk of the effort while openly stating his own desire to hold his state’s highest office.
Dear Rep. Issa,
Congratulations on achieving your goal of putting the recall on the ballot! You have once again proved that, with enough determination, willpower, and cold hard cash, anything is possible. Kudos to you sir.
During the early days of the recall effort, you blamed Gray Davis for California’s $38 billion deficit, and compared him to a CEO that needed to be ousted from a failing company. President Bush, meanwhile, has created a $455 billion deficit. Your dedication to a balanced budget, and your willingness to hold those who violate this principle publicly accountable, makes you a natural ally in our drive to help recall George W. Bush from office.
In your August 10 appearance on “Meet the Press,” you stated, “Working with Gray Davis is an inconsistent art because he doesn't do what he says he will do, at least consistently and reliably.” Like you, we share a scorn for government officials who mislead the public and pursue goals that blatantly oppose their stated agenda, like when President Bush unveiled his “No Child Left Behind” Act, his AIDS initiative in Africa, and the expansion of AmeriCorps – and then promptly denied funding to all three.
Your fabulously produced radio ad, asserts that Gov. Davis has ruined California’s economy, leading to “thousands of jobs lost.” Your devotion to the plight of the unemployed means that you probably already know that almost three million people have lost their jobs since Bush took office.
In conclusion, Rep. Issa, we look forward to your support on this issue. Having a hardened recall veteran with millions to spend on our side would give an invaluable boost to our cause. The parallels between these two situations are uncanny, and surely your high-minded commitment to your ideals will not allow you to turn your back on this pressing political situation.
Sincerely,
The Bush Recall Team
http://www.bushrecall.org/issa.asp
We the People of the United States of America
For the People of the United States of America
By the People of the United States of America
All for the People and All by the People
Nothing About the People Without the People
This is Democracy!
I've reconsidered your question and come up with an answer...
If Bush/Cheney were both impeached before November I would vote for a McCain ticket, in fact it would restore my faith in America if that happened to such an extent I would go to the ends of the earth to obtain my US citizenship and do whatever else it took so I could vote in the next election.
Does that answer it sufficiently for you?
We the People of the United States of America
For the People of the United States of America
By the People of the United States of America
All for the People and All by the People
Nothing About the People Without the People
This is Democracy!
Intelligence Officers Challenge Bush
by Veteran Intelligence Professionals for Sanity
May 1, 2003
MEMORANDUM FOR: The President
FROM: Veteran Intelligence Professionals for Sanity
SUBJECT: Intelligence Fiasco
We write to express deep concern over the growing mistrust and cynicism with which many, including veteran intelligence professionals inside and outside our movement, regard the intelligence cited by you and your chief advisers to justify the war against Iraq. The controversy over intelligence on Iraq has deep roots, going back a decade. It came to a head over recent months as intelligence was said to be playing a key role in support of your administration’s decision to make war on Iraq. And the controversy has now become acute, since you have been backed into the untenable position of assuming the former role of Saddam Hussein in refusing to cooperate with UN inspectors. (Chief UN nuclear inspector Mohamed ElBaradei noted earlier this week, “We have years of experience and know every scientist worth interviewing.”) The implications not only for US credibility abroad but also for the future of US intelligence are immense. They need to be addressed without delay.
Prominent pundits (and, quite probably, some of your own advisers) are now saying it does not matter whether so-called “weapons of mass destruction” are ever found in Iraq. Don’t let them fool you. It matters a great deal. The Wall Street Journal had it right in its page-one lead article on April 8:
Officials Debate Involving the UN in Verification:
American forces in Iraq are rapidly confronting two other tasks (besides hunting down Saddam Hussein) of enormous importance: finding any weapons of mass destruction and convincing the world the finds are real. The weapons search is a critical one for the Bush administration, which went to war charging that the Iraqi leader had hidden huge amounts of chemical and biological weapons and could pass them on to terrorists. If the US doesn’t make any undisputed discoveries of forbidden weapons, the failure will feed already-widespread skepticism abroad about the motives for going to war.”
The failure to find weapons of mass destruction six weeks after US and UK forces invaded Iraq suggests either that such weapons are simply not there, or that those eventually found there will not be in sufficient quantity or capability to support your repeated claim that Iraq posed a grave threat to our country’s security. Your opposition to inviting UN inspectors into Iraq feeds the suspicion that you wish to avoid independent verification; some even suggest that your administration wishes to preserve the option of “planting” such weapons to be “discovered” later. Sen. Carl Levin recently warned that, if some are found “Many people around the world will think we planted those weapons, unless the UN inspectors are there with us.”
Complicating matters still further, foreign resistance is building to lifting the economic sanctions against Iraq until the UN can certify that Iraq is free of weapons of mass destruction. Russian President Vladimir Putin this week joined others in insisting that only UN weapons inspectors can reliably certify that. With considerable bite and sarcasm, he asked Prime Minister Tony Blair on April 29, “Where are these arsenals of weapons of mass destruction, if they were there?”
What is at play here is a policy and intelligence fiasco of monumental proportions. It is essential that you be able to separate fact from fiction—for your own sake, and for the credibility of our country’s intelligence community. We urge you to do two things immediately:
(1) Invite UN inspectors to return to Iraq without further delay; and
(2) Ask Gen. Brent Scowcroft, Chair of your Foreign Intelligence Advisory Board, to launch an immediate inquiry into the performance of the CIA and other intelligence agencies in providing the intelligence upon which you have based your fateful decision for war against Iraq.
You may not realize the extent of the current ferment within the Intelligence Community and particularly the CIA. In intelligence, there is one unpardonable sin—cooking intelligence to the recipe of high policy. There is ample indication that this has been done with respect to Iraq. What remains not entirely clear is who the cooks are and where they practice their art. Are their kitchens only in the Pentagon, the National Security Council, and the Vice President’s office? There are troubling signs, as will be seen below, that some senior officials of the CIA may be graduates of the other CIA—the Culinary Institute of America.
While there have been occasions in the past when intelligence has been deliberately warped for political purposes, never before has such warping been used in such a systematic way to mislead our elected representatives into voting to authorize launching a war. It is essential that all this be sorted out; Gen. Scowcroft is uniquely qualified to lead such an investigation.
Some things are already quite clear to us from our own sources and analysis. We present them below in the hope that our findings will help get the investigation off to a quick start.
Forgery
One of the many lawmakers who believe they were deceived last summer and fall, Rep. Henry Waxman (D-CA) wrote you a letter on March 17, asking that you explain why “evidence” that your administration knew to be forged was used with him and others to garner votes for the war. Waxman was referring to bogus correspondence purporting to show that Iraq was trying to obtain in Africa uranium for nuclear weapons, and noted that it was the perceived need to prevent Iraq from developing nuclear weapons that provided “the most persuasive justification” for war. The continued lack of any White House response to Waxman’s letter can only feed the suspicion that there is no innocent explanation and that the use of the forged material was deliberate.
Determined to find out what had happened, Sen. Jay Rockefeller (D-WV), vice-chair of the Senate intelligence oversight committee, suggested that the committee ask the FBI investigate, but committee chair Pat Roberts (R-OK) resisted—giving a fresh meaning to the word “oversight.” Roberts said through a spokeswoman that it was “inappropriate for the FBI to investigate at this point.” Roberts then declined to join Rockefeller in signing a letter to the FBI requesting an investigation. Rockefeller sent one anyway but the response he has just received from the Bureau was a brush-off. Unless you give FBI Director Robert Mueller different instructions, it appears doubtful that any genuine investigation will take place.
Rep. Waxman is right to point out that the specter of Saddam Hussein armed with nuclear weapons was the crucial element that convinced many representatives and senators to vote to give you the authority to use military force against Iraq. It is now clear that bogus intelligence fed lawmakers’ fears before the vote on October 11, 2002.
NIC Memorandum: “Iraq’s Weapons of Mass Destruction Programs”
On October 4, 2002, a week before Congress voted on the war resolution, the National Intelligence Council, an interagency body under the CIA Director as head of the entire Intelligence Community, published an unclassified version of a memorandum that had been briefed to Congressmen and Senators over the previous weeks.
Among the key judgments: “Most analysts assess Iraq is reconstituting its nuclear weapons program.”
The clumsy clause conceals a crass cave-in. The preponderant view, then as now, among nuclear scientists and engineers of the Intelligence Community and the Department of Energy’s national laboratories is that Iraq had not been able to reconstitute in any significant way the nuclear development program dismantled by UN inspectors prior to 1998. The conclusions of the vast majority of analysts dovetailed with the findings repeatedly presented to the UN by International Atomic Energy Agency Director Mohamed ElBaradei and his inspectors after their inspection work at the turn of the year; i. e., that Iraq had no nuclear program worthy of the name.
The NIC memorandum’s discussion of alleged Iraqi attempts to reconstitute a nuclear weapons program does not pass muster as rigorous analysis. The only data offered that can remotely be called “evidence” is Iraq’s efforts to obtain high-strength aluminum tubes. The NIC memorandum claims, again, that “most intelligence specialists” believe the rods were intended for use in uranium enrichment, while “some believe that these tubes are probably intended for conventional weapons programs.”
The truth is just the opposite. Those who posit a nuclear application are in the distinct minority in the US and foreign intelligence, scientific, and engineering community.
The rest of the “evidence” adduced to support the existence of a “Nuclear Weapons Program” includes Baghdad’s failure to provide inspectors with all the information sought, the fact Saddam Hussein held frequent meetings with nuclear scientists, and the surmise that Baghdad “probably uses some money from illicit oil sales to support its weapons of mass destruction efforts.” The memorandum concedes that the IAEA “made significant strides toward dismantling Iraq’s nuclear weapons program,” but claims that, in the absence of inspections since late 1998, “most analysts assess that Iraq is reconstituting its nuclear program.” “Most analysts” in the Pentagon, perhaps; and in the Vice President’s office, surely; in the intelligence/scientific/engineering community, no.
Addressing how soon Iraq could go nuclear, the NIC memorandum states “Iraq is unlikely to produce indigenously enough weapons-grade material for a deliverable nuclear weapon until the last half of this decade.” It goes on to say that Iraq could produce a nuclear weapon “within a year,” if it could acquire the necessary fissile material abroad.
In your speech of October 7, 2002, just four days before the vote in Congress, your advisers had you blur that distinction and raise the prospect that if Iraq could “produce, buy, or steal” highly enriched uranium, it could have a nuclear weapon in less than a year. You went on to warn that “the smoking gun could come in the form of a mushroom cloud.” (The “mushroom cloud” specter was again used on October 8 by National Security Adviser Condoleezza Rice with Wolf Blitzer on national TV, and on October 9 by Assistant Secretary of Defense for Public Affairs Victoria Clarke with TV commentator Sam Donaldson.)
Interestingly, the NIC memorandum does not include the information from the forgery purporting to show that Iraq was trying to get uranium from Niger, although that material had been around for at least several weeks. Since the other “evidence,” like the argument from aluminum rods, was presented in such a way as to play up the threat from Iraq, the absence of the forgery information is conspicuous. Its absence may be explained by the reluctance of the purveyors of that information to make available the actual source material, which representatives of the various intelligence agencies preparing the NIC paper would have required, and the consequent likelihood that the hoax would be prematurely uncovered.
Whence the “Intelligence” on Weapons of Mass Destruction?
Glen Rangwala, the Cambridge University analyst who exposed the plagiarism by British intelligence of “evidence” on Iraq from a graduate student in California, suggests that much of the information on such weapons has come from Ahmed Chalabi’s Iraqi National Congress (INC), which has received Pentagon money for intelligence gathering. “The INC saw the demand and provided what was needed,” says Rangwala. “The implication is that they polluted the whole US intelligence effort.”
It is well known in intelligence circles that Deputy Secretary of Defense Paul Wolfowitz has overseen the polluting of the stream of intelligence reporting on Iraq with a flood of fabricated material from Chalabi, who has few supporters and still fewer sources inside Iraq. When both the CIA and the Defense Intelligence Agency refused to give credence to such reporting, Defense Secretary Rumsfeld set up his own intelligence analysis unit headed by Rich Haver—a passed-over but still ambitious aspirant to the post of CIA director. The contribution of reporting from émigrés has been highly touted for months by Rumsfeld and Wolfowitz, who seem unaware of Machiavelli’s warning that of all intelligence sources, exiles are the least reliable.
In the face of like admonitions from the Intelligence Community, Wolfowitz has chosen to take the offensive. He has stated in public, for example, that CIA analysis “is not worth the paper it is written on.”
/s/
Richard Beske, San Diego
Kathleen McGrath Christison, Santa Fe
William Christison, Santa Fe
Raymond McGovern, Arlington, VA
Steering Group
Veteran Intelligence Professionals for Sanity
Veteran Intelligence Professionals for Sanity (VIPS) is a coast-to-coast enterprise; mostly intelligence officers from analysis side of CIA. Ray McGovern (rmcgovern@slschool.org) worked as a CIA analyst for 27 years.
We the People of the United States of America
For the People of the United States of America
By the People of the United States of America
All for the People and All by the People
Nothing About the People Without the People
This is Democracy!
Turn off the TV, cancel your cable, boycott all imports, sell all your stocks and bonds, dump everything, boycott the stock market, start a hunger strike, start a general national strike, withdraw everything from the banks, don't buy any magazines. There are thousands of little ways the people can rise up and throw out the Republicons and Demoncrats without violence, without war, without weapons of massive destruction which they have no control over anyway.
It doesn't take a Republicon controlled Congress to do that, it takes a majority of fed up Americans.
Boycott Gas, Boycott Luxury Goods, A national General Strike worked well in India under Ghandi, despite his violent beatings and assassination, it took the arrogant British out of the equation...Marcos was ousted without a shot...California did it...
All reality starts with a fantasy but the impeachment issue is part of the reality of at least 400,000 supporters across the country...
Don't complain or abstain from the issues, take action. Bush is Bad Business.
To control the masses, the bigger the lie, the harder it is for them to believe it isn't the truth.
McCain, anyone but Bush and Cheney, but they both need to go, then the Vulcan team will go with them. Republicons can keep the power, they just need someone more honest in there.
Currently at least 400,000 people support the impeachment movement which started almost a year ago. To gain momentum the impeachment letter sent out two by two by each recipient, particularly through the demoncrat network who want to oust Bush/Cheney either way, election or impeachment, would reach two million in a week. If you double that number every week, well do the math...by June, every Demoncrat in the country would have sent the letter (you have to admit it is very well written and crafted) to their Congressmen, Senator, Governor, and person of the people in their personal people network.
It has already reached the Chairman of the Judiciary committee and these orgs are supporting the idea and have also recieved copies of the email letter:
http://www.votetoimpeach.org/
http://www.impeach-bush-now.org/
Articles of Impeachment have already been drafted by various orgs. It worked in California, why not nationally?
We the People of the United States of America
For the People of the United States of America
By the People of the United States of America
All for the People and All by the People
Nothing About the People Without the People
This is Democracy!
GAG
But, but, but...
I've noticed the same thing, however, you have to admit that politics seem to be tied closely to economics and economics seem to be very tightly knit and woven woof and warp with the stock market, and many times I noticed that whatever coverage the media has of political developments tends to affect the stock markets around the world, so political intelligence is a useful tool to the saavy investor.
I think its called "fundamentals" as opposed to what is that other measuring stick for predicting stock prices? Stochastics?
Doesn't good political news drive stock prices upward and bad news drive them down?
Isn't there some correlation between geopolitics and stock markets?
I wonder how many people in the intelligence community would now support the impeachment of both Bush and Cheney before the November elections?
Intelligence Officers Challenge Bush
by Veteran Intelligence Professionals for Sanity
CommonDreams.org
Richard Beske, San Diego
Kathleen McGrath Christison, Santa Fe
William Christison, Santa Fe
Raymond McGovern, Arlington, VA
Steering Group
Veteran Intelligence Professionals for Sanity
Veteran Intelligence Professionals for Sanity (VIPS) is a coast-to-coast enterprise; mostly intelligence officers from analysis side of CIA. Ray McGovern (rmcgovern@slschool.org) worked as a CIA analyst for 27 years.
http://www.impeach-bush-now.org/Articles/Bush/challenge.htm
Standard Operating Procedure
By Paul Krugman
The New York Times
Tuesday 03 June 2003
The mystery of Iraq's missing weapons of mass destruction has become a lot less mysterious. Recent reports in major British newspapers and three major American news magazines, based on leaks from angry intelligence officials, back up the sources who told my colleague Nicholas Kristof that the Bush administration "grossly manipulated intelligence" about W.M.D.'s.
And anyone who talks about an "intelligence failure" is missing the point. The problem lay not with intelligence professionals, but with the Bush and Blair administrations. They wanted a war, so they demanded reports supporting their case, while dismissing contrary evidence.
In Britain, the news media have not been shy about drawing the obvious implications, and the outrage has not been limited to war opponents. The Times of London was ardently pro-war; nonetheless, it ran an analysis under the headline "Lie Another Day." The paper drew parallels between the selling of the war and other misleading claims: "The government is seen as having `spun' the threat from Saddam's weapons just as it spins everything else."
Yet few have made the same argument in this country, even though "spin" is far too mild a word for what the Bush administration does, all the time. Suggestions that the public was manipulated into supporting an Iraq war gain credibility from the fact that misrepresentation and deception are standard operating procedure for this administration, which — to an extent never before seen in U.S. history — systematically and brazenly distorts the facts.
Am I exaggerating? Even as George Bush stunned reporters by declaring that we have "found the weapons of mass destruction," the Republican National Committee declared that the latest tax cut benefits "everyone who pays taxes." That is simply a lie. You've heard about those eight million children denied any tax break by a last-minute switcheroo. In total, 50 million American households — including a majority of those with members over 65 — get nothing; another 20 million receive less than $100 each. And a great majority of those left behind do pay taxes.
And the bald-faced misrepresentation of an elitist tax cut offering little or nothing to most Americans is only the latest in a long string of blatant misstatements. Misleading the public has been a consistent strategy for the Bush team on issues ranging from tax policy and Social Security reform to energy and the environment. So why should we give the administration the benefit of the doubt on foreign policy?
It's long past time for this administration to be held accountable. Over the last two years we've become accustomed to the pattern. Each time the administration comes up with another whopper, partisan supporters — a group that includes a large segment of the news media — obediently insist that black is white and up is down. Meanwhile the "liberal" media report only that some people say that black is black and up is up. And some Democratic politicians offer the administration invaluable cover by making excuses and playing down the extent of the lies.
If this same lack of accountability extends to matters of war and peace, we're in very deep trouble. The British seem to understand this: Max Hastings, the veteran war correspondent — who supported Britain's participation in the war — writes that "the prime minister committed British troops and sacrificed British lives on the basis of a deceit, and it stinks."
It's no answer to say that Saddam was a murderous tyrant. I could point out that many of the neoconservatives who fomented this war were nonchalant, or worse, about mass murders by Central American death squads in the 1980's. But the important point is that this isn't about Saddam: it's about us. The public was told that Saddam posed an imminent threat. If that claim was fraudulent, the selling of the war is arguably the worst scandal in American political history — worse than Watergate, worse than Iran-contra. Indeed, the idea that we were deceived into war makes many commentators so uncomfortable that they refuse to admit the possibility.
But here's the thought that should make those commentators really uncomfortable. Suppose that this administration did con us into war. And suppose that it is not held accountable for its deceptions, so Mr. Bush can fight what Mr. Hastings calls a "khaki election" next year. In that case, our political system has become utterly, and perhaps irrevocably, corrupted.
Must be from all those emails flying about the impeachment coming for Bush and Cheney.
Bush Family Whitewashing in Iraq and Nazi Germany
By CHRIS FLOYD
Holocaust revisionism took decades to rear its ugly head, but the whitewashers of war crimes in the Bush Regime are trying to pervert the facts of history mere weeks after their Leader triumphantly declared "mission accomplished" in the war on Iraq. "Weapons of mass destruction?" Never heard of 'em. Never mentioned 'em. Maybe we'll find some. Not that important. Time to move on. Hey, how about a tax cut?
But even as revisionist-in-chief George W. Bush was staging his somber photo-op in Auschwitz last week, the web of lies he and his little buddy Tony Blair concocted to "justify" launching an act of military aggression--on the very Hitlerian grounds of "preventive war"--was being shredded by their own intelligence services. In an unprecedented move, U.S and British spies went public to denounce the cartoonish manipulation of professional intelligence data by the war-hungry leaders. Reports of Saddam's "imminent threat" were "sexed up" on Blair's order, said UK spooks, while American agents said Bush was spoonfed a stew of uncorroborated confabulation by a "special team" of ideological hatchet-men overseen by Pentagon honcho Don Rumsfeld. Congressional and Parliamentary probes are now afoot.
In the end, the "weapons of mass destruction" that the Christian Coalition had sworn were "armed and ready" to unleash unspeakable carnage on the world turned out to be--by Bush's own admission--a couple of trucks, which contained not a speck of hazardous material. Not exactly the fearsome arsenal the Dear Leader had invoked, in ever-increasing detail, throughout the long buildup to aggression. The actual CIA report which Bush cited was even more--or rather, less--revealing, noting that the trucks' designs were in fact consistent with their stated purpose: the production of hydrogen for weather balloons, Slate.com reports.
Thus revisionism--panicky, cynical, maladroit--was the order of the day. Rumsfeld--whose smirking rictus of iron certainty was a mainstay of the drive to war--began backing off big-time. Maybe there ***weren't*** any WMD, he shrugged; maybe Saddam destroyed them before the war. Unfortunately, the UK press dug up a quote from St. Tony himself on the subject: "We are asked to accept Saddam decided to destroy those weapons. I say that such a claim is palpably absurd." But to be fair, Blair's broadside ***was*** fired long ago, practically in cave-man times: March 18, 2003, to be exact. It's certainly irrelevant in our go-go modern world, where history is written with water and each day is a new blank page.
So it was most apt that the only question Bush was heard to ask during his Auschwitz tour actually dealt with Holocaust revisionism: "Do people challenge the accuracy of what you present?" he asked his guide, the New York Times reports. This might seem a rather bizarre question at first glance--but then, Bush has a personal stake in the cultivation of historical amnesia. His own family fortune was built in part by a long and profitable collusion with the Nazis--an ugly story oft told here, and raked up again by Newsweek Poland during the presidential visit.
Bush's grandfather, Prescott Bush, and Prescott's father-in-law, George Herbert Walker, helped finance the rise of the Nazi Party through their intimate entanglements with Nazi industrial, shipping and banking interests. This long (and well-documented) collaboration continued even after America was at war with Nazi Germany. It seems the blood money was just too good to pass up--even if it had to be dug out of the corpses of young American soldiers and innocent civilians throughout Europe and North Africa. The Walker-Bush cabal's Nazi partners also helped finance--then profited from--the Auschwitz camp. Finally, in 1942, the U.S. government seized the Walker-Bush Nazi assets under the Trading With the Enemy Act. But the well-connected clan managed to bury the news in the back pages: brief mentions of the companies involved, but no names of the Establishment grandees behind them. They also pulled strings to keep their American assets from being seized as well, even though the profits from these enterprises were inextricably mixed with their Nazi loot. Prescott later cashed in these tainted assets for millions, a nest egg that helped launch him into the Senate and his son and grandson into the White House.
So perhaps George Walker Bush felt uneasy treading on the bone-ash that lies beneath the soft, green grass of Auschwitz. Or perhaps not. For quietly buried in the back pages last week was news that the Walker-Bush tradition of war profiteering carries on. A small brief in the Financial Times revealed that Bush-connected "reconstruction" firms Halliburton and Bechtel, now in control of Iraq's oil fields, want to raise massive bank loans using future oil profits as collateral. In other words, these Establishment grandees will pocket billions in free money that will have to be paid back later by the Iraqi people, if and when their oil fields are returned.
Both companies made millions with Saddam during the dictator's murderous heyday: Bechtel helped build Saddam's mustard-gas plants, while Halliburton, under Cheney, pocketed $73 million working with Saddam's UN-sanctioned regime after the first Gulf War. Meanwhile, Halliburton--which still pays Cheney a tidy annual sum--was handed yet another no-bid Iraq contract last week: $400 million in government grease this time.
That's the way of the war profiteers, these men of "honor and integrity" who build their family fortunes, their corporate treasuries and their political dynasties on bone-ash. The grass they tread is always soft.
Chris Floyd is a columnist for the Moscow Times and a regular contributor to CounterPunch. He can be reached at: cfloyd72@hotmail.com
It Was the Lying, Right?
Clinton, Bush and Impeachment
By DAVE LINDORFF
Everyone agreed that it was not the sex. It was the lying, right? If having extramarital sex in the White House were an impeachable offense, the impeachment of presidents would long ago have become a routine affair. We'd have seen Roosevelt, Ike, Kennedy, Johnson, Nixon and Bush the Elder in the dock for sure, and maybe Ron, too.
But everyone agreed it wasn't the sex that got President Clinton in trouble. It was the lying. The audacious bending of the meaning of the word is and the word sex. Right?
But has lying ever been practiced so blatantly as it is being practiced today in the White House?
At least President Clinton's lies were about his personal behavior. This administration has done its share of that kind of lying, to be sure. For example about the President's cowardly conduct during the 9/11 attacks, or about Vice President Cheney's dealings with Enron executives as the company was tanking. Or about President Bush's year as an AWOL guardsman during the Vietnam War.
But this administration's lying has gone far beyond that, and has led to the deaths of thousands, including well over a hundred Americans (and counting). This is prevarication on a scale that rivals the Johnson Adminstration's lie about the purposted attack on an American destroyer in the Gulf of Tonkin, or the Nixon Administration's lie about its secret war in Cambodia.
Like Johnson's big lie, which led to the deaths of over 50,000 Americans and of millions of Southeast Asians, the Bush Administration's lies about Iraq--that it had biological and chemical weapons ready to use and that it was well on the way to developing nuclear weapons of that it was directly supporting Al Qaeda--were deliberately designed to trick Congress and the American Public into supporting a war that otherwise would not have happened--in the first instance against North Vietnam and in the second against Iraq.
Both of these deceptions were murderous lies.
Remember: Nixon's lie about U.S. aggression against the neutral nation of Cambodia--another murderous lie--was one of the articles of impeachment that were voted against him in the House of Representatives. Johnson never had to face the music for his monstrous lie, but perhaps had he not decided not to seek a second elected term of office, he too might have ended up being impeached for it.
Now it's Bush's turn.
But where are the voices calling for his impeachment?
Where is the public outcry demanding that he be called to account for his shameless and bloody deception of the American public and the Congress?
It is likely that with American troops still patrolling the streets of Baghdad, and still getting attacked and killed there, and with most American's still revelling in the thrill of the military's quick victory over Saddam Hussein's army, nobody's ready to call Bush and his cronies on their crimes of falsehood.
But the buoyant nationalistic mood is liable to shift dramatically as the Iraq situation continues to deteriorate, and as the American body count continues to rise. Particularly if, as is likely, the economy stays in the doldrums.
At some point it will start to become politically acceptable to start asking, "If everybody's mad at us, why are we over there?" Once that happens, the next question will be "How did we get into this mess in the first place?"
That's when Bush's big lie will start to loom large in the public's assessment of this administration.
As for impeachment, as long as Congress remains in the hands of the Republican Party, it's not likely. That makes the 2004 election doubly important. Even if Bush manages to eke out a narrow victory again in 2004, it is critically important that Democrats regain control of at least one house of Congress.
It may seem hard to imagine today, but if the voters manage that, we may yet see another impeachment drama.
Dave Lindorff is the author of Killing Time: an Investigation into the Death Row Case of Mumia Abu-Jamal. A collection of Lindorff's stories can be found here: http://www.nwuphilly.org/dave.html
We Used To Impeach Liars
By William Rivers Pitt
t r u t h o u t / Perspective
Tuesday 03 June 2003
In September of 2002, fully six months before George W. Bush attacked Iraq, I published a small book entitled "War on Iraq: What Team Bush Doesn't Want You To Know." The essential premise of the book was that the threats surrounding weapons of mass destruction in Iraq were wildly overblown by the Bush administration for purely political reasons. In the opening paragraphs, I framed the argument as follows:
According to Bush and the men who are pushing him towards this war-Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld, Deputy Defense Secretary Paul Wolfowitz, and Richard Perle.The United States will institute a "regime change" in Iraq, and bring forth the birth of a new democracy in the region. Along the way, we will remove Saddam Hussein, a man who absolutely, positively has weapons of mass destruction, a man who will use these weapons against his neighbors because he has done so in the past, a man who will give these terrible weapons to Osama bin Laden for use against America.
A fairly cut-and-dried case, no? America is more than prepared to listen to these pleasing arguments about evil in black and white, particularly after the horrors of September 11th. Few can contemplate in comfort the existence of chemical, biological, and nuclear weapons in the hands of a madman like Saddam Hussein. The merest whisper that he might give these weapons to Qaeda terrorists is enough to rob any rational American of sleep. Saddam has been so demonized in the American media-ever since the first President Bush compared him to Hitler-that they believe the case has been fully and completely made for his immediate removal.
Yet facts are stubborn things, as John Adams once claimed while successfully defending British redcoats on trial for the Boston Massacre. We may hate someone with passion, and we may fear them in our souls, but if the facts cannot establish a clear and concise basis for our fear and hatred, if the facts do not defend the actions we would take against them, then we must look elsewhere for the basis of that fear. Simultaneously, we must take stock of those stubborn facts, and understand the manner in which they define the reality-not the rhetoric-of our world.
The case for war against Iraq has not been made. This is a fact. It is doubtful in the extreme that Saddam Hussein has retained any functional aspect of the chemical, nuclear, and biological weapons programs so thoroughly dismantled by the United Nations weapons inspectors who worked tirelessly in Iraq for seven years. This is also a fact.
This was a straightforward argument, set against stern and unrelenting prophesies of doom from Bush administration officials, and from Bush himself. I can tell you, as the writer, that it was a tough sell. The facts contained in the book were absolutely accurate, as has been proven in the aftermath of war, but Americans are funny. They fall for Hitler's maxim on lies over and over again: "The great masses of the people will more easily fall victim to a big lie than to a small one." Over and over and over and over and over again, the American people were told that Saddam Hussein had weapons of mass destruction practically falling out of his ears. The American people were told that Hussein was giving away these weapons to Osama bin Laden and al Qaeda the way you and I might give away birthday presents.
Feast for a moment, on this brief timeline:
"Simply stated, there is no doubt that Saddam Hussein now has weapons of mass destruction."
- Dick Cheney, August 26 2002
"If he declares he has none, then we will know that Saddam Hussein is once again misleading the world."
- Ari Fleischer, December 2 2002
"We know for a fact that there are weapons there."
- Ari Fleischer, January 9 2003
"We know that Saddam Hussein is determined to keep his weapons of mass destruction, is determined to make more."
- Colin Powell, February 5 2003
"Well, there is no question that we have evidence and information that Iraq has weapons of mass destruction, biological and chemical particularly . . . all this will be made clear in the course of the operation, for whatever duration it takes."
- Ari Fleischer, March 21 2003
"There is no doubt that the regime of Saddam Hussein possesses weapons of mass destruction. As this operation continues, those weapons will be identified, found, along with the people who have produced them and who guard them."
- Gen. Tommy Franks, March 22 2003
"We know where they are. They are in the area around Tikrit and Baghdad."
- Donald Rumsfeld, March 30 2003
"I think you have always heard, and you continue to hear from officials, a measure of high confidence that, indeed, the weapons of mass destruction will be found."
- Ari Fleischer, April 10 2003
"There are people who in large measure have information that we need . . . so that we can track down the weapons of mass destruction in that country."
- Donald Rumsfeld, April 25 2003
"I am confident that we will find evidence that makes it clear he had weapons of mass destruction."
- Colin Powell, May 4 2003
These are the words of administration officials who were following orders and the party line. It has been axiomatic for quite a while now that the people behind the scenes, and not the Main Man Himself, are running the ways and means of this administration. Harken back to the campaign in 2000, when the glaring deficiencies in ability and experience displayed by George W. Bush were salved by the fact that a number of heavy hitters would be backstopping him. Yet a Democrat named Harry Truman once said, "The buck stops here." What did the man in receipt of said stopped buck have to say on the matter?
"Right now, Iraq is expanding and improving facilities that were used for the production of biological weapons."
- George W. Bush, September 12 2002
"Our intelligence officials estimate that Saddam Hussein had the materials to produce as much as 500 tons of sarin, mustard and VX nerve agent."
- George W. Bush, State of the Union address, January 28 2003
"We have sources that tell us that Saddam Hussein recently authorized Iraqi field commanders to use chemical weapons -- the very weapons the dictator tells us he does not have."
- George Bush, February 8 2003
"Intelligence gathered by this and other governments leaves no doubt that the Iraq regime continues to possess and conceal some of the most lethal weapons ever devised."
- George Bush, March 17 2003
"We are learning more as we interrogate or have discussions with Iraqi scientists and people within the Iraqi structure, that perhaps he destroyed some, perhaps he dispersed some. And so we will find them."
- George Bush, April 24 2003
"We'll find them. It'll be a matter of time to do so."
- George Bush, May 3 2003
"I'm not surprised if we begin to uncover the weapons program of Saddam Hussein -- because he had a weapons program."
- George W. Bush, May 6 2003
It has become all too clear in the last several days that the horrid descriptions of weapons of mass destruction in Iraq were nothing more than the Big Lie which Hitler described. The American people, being the trusting TV-stoned folks they are, bought this WMD lie bag and baggage. Imagine the shock within the administration when Lieutenant General James Conway, top US Marine Commander in Iraq, said that American intelligence on Iraqi WMDs was "Simply wrong." Conway went on to state about the WMDs that, "We've been to virtually every ammunition supply point between the Kuwaiti border and Baghdad, but they're simply not there."
Imagine the consternation within the administration when Deputy Secretary of the Department of Defense Paul Wolfowitz said on May 28 that, "For bureaucratic reasons, we settled on one issue, weapons of mass destruction (as justification for invading Iraq) because it was the one reason everyone could agree on." A short translation of that comment is as straightforward as one can get - There was no real threat of WMDs, but everyone who wanted the war for whatever reasons decided to settle on that concept because it was an easy sell to Americans still traumatized by September 11.
Imagine the teeth-gnashing within the administration when Patrick Lang, former head of worldwide human intelligence gathering for the Defense Intelligence Agency, accused Defense Secretary Don Rumsfeld's personal intelligence team of having "cherry-picked the intelligence stream" to make it seem like the WMD threat in Iraq was real. Lang went on to say that the DIA was "exploited and abused and bypassed in the process of making the case for war in Iraq based on the presence of WMD." Vince Cannistraro, former chief of the CIA counterterrorist operations, described serving intelligence officers who blame the Pentagon for proffering "fraudulent" intelligence, "a lot of it sourced from the Iraqi National Congress of Ahmad Chalabi."
Ahmad Chalabi, it should be noted, is the hand-picked-by-Don-Rumsfeld successor to power in Iraq. Chalabi was convicted in 1992 of 31 counts of bank fraud and embezzlement in Jordan and sentenced to 22 years hard labor in absentia. Even the most optimistic of intelligence observers take what he has to say with a massive grain of salt. Certainly, as the chosen leader of Iraq - a position he has enjoyed thanks to Rumsfeld and his cabal since 1997 - Chalabi had no reason whatsoever to exaggerate or lie about Iraq's weapons program. Of course.
The process of proving the presence of Iraqi WMDs has been tortured, to say the least. Bush at one point described recent Iraqi efforts to purchase "significant quantities of uranium from Africa." Greg Thielmann, recently resigned from the State Department's Bureau of Intelligence and Research, was appalled by these claims. "When I saw that, I was really blown away," said Thielmann. His Bureau of Intelligence and Research had absolutely debunked this claim. The documents used to support the accusation were crude forgeries - the name on the letterhead of the main evidentiary document was that of a Nigerian minister who had been out of office for ten years. When he saw that Bush was using the fraudulent documentation to back up his claims, he thought to himself, "Not that stupid piece of garbage," according to Newsweek.
And then, of course, there was the famous presentation by Colin Powell to the UN on February 5th. Powell held aloft a British Intelligence dossier on the current status of Iraqi weapons, praised it lavishly, and used it as the central underpinnings of his argument that Iraq was a clear and present danger. It came to light some days later that vast swaths of the dossier he praised had been plagiarized from a magazine article penned five months earlier by a California graduate student from California whose focus had been Iraq circa 1991. You can read more on this aspect of the mess in my article from that time entitled Blair, Powell UN Report Written By Student. Last week, Powell described this profoundly flawed UN presentation as "the best analytic product that we could have put up."
The aggravation within the administration, after all these statements, caused George W. Bush to exclaim on May 30, "But for those who say we haven't found the banned manufacturing devices or banned weapons, they're wrong, we found them." He was referring to an alleged Iraqi mobile chemical laboratory, one of the "Winnebagos of Death" described by Colin Powell. Said mobile facility contained exactly zero evidence of having been used to produce weapons of any kind, and was in fact most likely used as a mobile food testing platform in the service of Saddam Hussein, who was always paranoid about assassination.
Over 170 American soldiers died in the second war in Iraq. The Iraqi populace is deeply angered by the American presence in their country, and they are armed to the teeth. More soldiers will die in the impossible police action that has become victory's inheritance. Thousands of Iraqi civilians have died, along with untold scores of Iraqi soldiers. The Middle East has been inflamed by the war; bombings in Riyadh and Casablanca provide a bleak preview of what is to come. According to Mr. Bush, the entire thing was aimed at that one mobile lab. The thousands of tons of WMDs we were promised do not exist, so that empty mobile lab is what we must settle for if we are to justify this war in our hearts and minds.
Once upon a time, we impeached a sitting President for lying under oath about sexual trysts. No one died, no one had their legs or arms or face or genitals blown off because of the lies of a President who had been caught with his pants down. Today in America, we endure a sitting President who lied for months about the threat posed by a sovereign nation. That nation was invaded and attacked, and thousands died because of it. The aftereffects of this action will be felt for generations to come. The very democracy which gives us meaning as a country has been put in peril by these deeds. When the smoke cleared, every reason for that war was proven to be a lie.
Of course, there will be no impeachment with a Republican Congress. This must not dissuade us from demanding satisfaction. Let the House be brought to order. Gavel the members to attention, and let the evidence be brought forth. Let there be justice for the living and the dead. Let this man Bush be impeached and cleansed from office for the lies he has told. These are not innocent lies. The dead remember.
-------
William Rivers Pitt is a New York Times best-selling author of two books - "War On Iraq" available now from Context Books, and "The Greatest Sedition is Silence," now available from Pluto Press at http://www.silenceissedition.com/. Scott Lowery contributed research to this report. Bill Chirolas located the administration quotations.
The National Campaign to Impeach George W. Bush has focused on U.S. unilateral aggression toward Iraq, violations of Constitutional and International Law and breaches of the United Nations Charter. Under U.S. Law, George W. Bush has exceeded the powers of the Office of President. He has conspired and committed war crimes in violation of the Hague and Geneva Conventions.
The current Resolution for Impeachment contains six articles accusing President George W. Bush of conspiring to use weapons of mass destruction, bribing and bullying foreign heads of state, acting without Congressional consent, acting contrary to the U.N. Charter (of which the United States is a signatory), and of enacting laws which establish an American police state thereby violating the Bill of Rights.
more info
Contact
Media Contact:
Professor Francis A Boyle
fboyle@law.uiuc.edu
Get Involved, Contact:
Zach Cravens
zcravens@students.uiuc.edu
Join the Announcement List:
CIBCAR List on Yahoo Groups
cibcar-subscribe@yahoogroups.com
Donations may be sent to:
National Campaign to Impeach Bush,
Cheney, Ashcroft and Rumsfeld (CIBCAR)
P.O. Box 5062,
Champaign, IL 61825
Congratulations! Your vote to impeach was submitted successfully.
The votes submitted in this campaign will be delivered to the House Judiciary Committee and the leadership from both parties on the committee. We will also carry out a campaign in the mass media publicizing the efforts of thousands of people in the United States to impeach George W. Bush and the architects of his unconstitutional policies, as well as a letters to the editor campaign and other organizing and activities.
http://www.votetoimpeach.org/
Join the over 383,000 who have already voted to impeach Bush
We the people did it in California, there is no reason not to do it nationally. All it takes is the number of people to double every week for the impeachment process to move forward well ahead of the election. When he is impeached, the Republicons will need a new man or woman on their ballot.
Does it make any difference whether a Republicon or a Demoncrat is in office?
He apologised to the American public and wrote his version of the truth didn't he?
The solution is to impeach both Bush and Cheney before November so the republicans would have to put another candidate up on the ballot. Americans would then have another choice in the matter instead of the duoply proposition.
Not exactly, the Supreme Court may some day rule that under the Fifth Amendment, the Defendant was not asked what her ability was or what it meant, so therefore the Defendant's testimony should be stricken and sealed. Defendant had the ability to refuse to give any information which might be used for self incrimination.
http://www.arts.uwa.edu.au/PhilosWWW/Staff/mscpubs.html
http://www.arts.uwa.edu.au/PhilosWWW/Staff/candlish.html
http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/truth-identity/
Convergys to Expand Learning Outsourcing Capabilities With Acquisition of DigitalThink
Thursday March 25, 7:13 am ET
Convergys to Strengthen Learning Offering by Including Innovative Content Development and Delivery Services
CINCINNATI & SAN FRANCISCO--(BUSINESS WIRE)--March 25, 2004-- Convergys Corporation (NYSE:CVG - News), the global leader in integrated billing, employee care, and customer care services, announced today it is expanding its global capabilities in learning outsourcing services to include innovative content development and delivery services through a strategic acquisition.
Convergys signed a purchase agreement to acquire San Francisco-based DigitalThink, Inc. (Nasdaq:DTHK - News) for $2.40 per share in cash, for an aggregate purchase price of approximately $120 million for all outstanding shares. DigitalThink is the leader in custom e-learning for the Fortune 1000 and the largest custom e-learning company in the industry. Its learning solutions include consulting services, cutting-edge simulations, custom online course development, and a scalable technology platform for on-demand course delivery.
"The acquisition of DigitalThink is a further demonstration of our strategic commitment to Employee Care as a major growth engine for Convergys and further strengthens our growing leadership position in HR Business Process Outsourcing. It also creates a new set of capabilities for us in the learning outsourcing segment while adding an additional revenue stream and new customers," said Steve Rolls, Convergys Executive Vice President, Global Customer Management and Employee Care. "Convergys had been working closely with DigitalThink as an alliance partner over the past several months. As a result of this strong relationship, DigitalThink became an attractive acquisition opportunity for us."
Convergys' outsourced learning capabilities will enable global organizations to improve skills and productivity for their workforce through web-based courses and simulation training.
With this acquisition, Convergys will:
offer a new set of capabilities to help the world's top organizations maximize the value of their internal and external customer relationships through customized, on-demand courses;
expand its capabilities in the HR Business Process Outsourcing market to meet the needs of large global organizations for full service learning solutions including consulting and course design, development, delivery, and administration; and
support its global HR and Customer Management clients more efficiently by accelerating the effectiveness of customer support teams through on-the-job training for client programs.
"We are excited to become a part of Convergys," said Michael Pope, President and CEO of DigitalThink. "Combining forces with Convergys will allow our customers to benefit from the broad Convergys Customer Management and Employee Care offerings, and Convergys' global client base will be able to leverage the strength of our talented employees and our extensive learning services offering."
DigitalThink is headquartered in San Francisco and has about 375 employees and many clients. Historically, EDS was the company's largest client, but as a result of a recent contract dispute, EDS is no longer a DigitalThink client.
DigitalThink's Board of Directors unanimously approved the acquisition by Convergys and signed voting agreements. Integrating the DigitalThink acquisition into Convergys will be approximately $0.02 dilutive to earnings in 2004 and neutral to accretive thereafter.
About DigitalThink
DigitalThink is the leader in custom e-learning for Fortune 1000 companies. It provides the right combination of courseware development, do-it-yourself capabilities, learning delivery, and industry-specific expertise. DigitalThink has served over 500 clients including ADP Dealer Services, BearingPoint, Circuit City, Kinko's, Mazda, and Red Hat.
About Convergys
Convergys Corporation (NYSE:CVG - News), a member of the S&P 500 and the Forbes' Platinum 400, is the global leader in integrated billing, employee care, and customer care services provided through outsourcing or licensing. We serve top companies in telecommunications, Internet, cable and broadband services, technology, financial services, and other industries in more than 40 countries. We also provide integrated, outsourced, human resource services to leading companies across a broad range of industries.
We bring together world-class resources, software, and expertise to help create valuable relationships between our clients and their customers and their employees. This commitment is validated by the more than 1.5 million individual bills our software produces each day to support more than 100 million subscribers, and by the more than 1.7 million separate customer and employee contacts we manage each day, both live and via electronic interaction.
Convergys® employs more than 55,000 people in 53 customer contact centers and in our data centers and other offices in the United States, Canada, Latin America, Europe, the Middle East, and Asia. Convergys is on the net at www.convergys.com, and has world headquarters in Cincinnati.
(Convergys and the Convergys logo are registered trademarks of Convergys Corporation.)
NOTE:
In connection with the proposed transaction, DigitalThink intends to file a proxy statement and other relevant materials with the Securities and Exchange Commission ("SEC"). BEFORE MAKING ANY VOTING DECISION WITH RESPECT TO THE PROPOSED TRANSACTION, INVESTORS AND STOCKHOLDERS OF DIGITALTHINK ARE URGED TO READ THE PROXY STATEMENT AND OTHER RELEVANT MATERIALS BECAUSE THEY WILL CONTAIN IMPORTANT INFORMATION ABOUT THE PROPOSED TRANSACTION. The proxy statement and other relevant materials, and any other documents filed by DigitalThink with the SEC, may be obtained free of charge at the SEC's web site at www.sec.gov. In addition, investors and stockholders of DigitalThink may obtain free copies of the documents filed with the SEC by contacting the Chief Financial Officer of DigitalThink at (415) 625-4076 or by writing to the Chief Financial Officer at DigitalThink, Inc., 601 Brannan Street, San Francisco, CA 94107. You may also read and copy any reports, statements, and other information filed by DigitalThink with the SEC at the SEC public reference room at 450 Fifth Street, NW, Room 1200, Washington, D.C. 20549. Please call the SEC at (800) SEC-0330 or visit the SEC's web site for further information on its public reference room.
DigitalThink and its executive officers and directors may be deemed to be participants in the solicitation of proxies from the DigitalThink stockholders in favor of the proposed transaction. Certain executive officers and directors of DigitalThink have interests in the proposed transaction that may differ from the interests of stockholders generally, including acceleration of vesting of stock options and continuation of director and officer insurance and indemnification. These interests will be described in the proxy statement when it becomes available.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Contact:
Convergys Corporation
Business and Financial Media, John Pratt
+1 513 723 3333 or +1 888 284 9900
or john.pratt@convergys.com
International FreeFone, access AT&T, then 1 888 284 9900
Trade Media
Patricia Johnson
+1 954 961 4307 or patricia.johnson@convergys.com
Convergys to Expand Learning Outsourcing Capabilities With Acquisition of DigitalThink
Thursday March 25, 7:13 am ET
Convergys to Strengthen Learning Offering by Including Innovative Content Development and Delivery Services
CINCINNATI & SAN FRANCISCO--(BUSINESS WIRE)--March 25, 2004-- Convergys Corporation (NYSE:CVG - News), the global leader in integrated billing, employee care, and customer care services, announced today it is expanding its global capabilities in learning outsourcing services to include innovative content development and delivery services through a strategic acquisition.
Convergys signed a purchase agreement to acquire San Francisco-based DigitalThink, Inc. (Nasdaq:DTHK - News) for $2.40 per share in cash, for an aggregate purchase price of approximately $120 million for all outstanding shares. DigitalThink is the leader in custom e-learning for the Fortune 1000 and the largest custom e-learning company in the industry. Its learning solutions include consulting services, cutting-edge simulations, custom online course development, and a scalable technology platform for on-demand course delivery.
"The acquisition of DigitalThink is a further demonstration of our strategic commitment to Employee Care as a major growth engine for Convergys and further strengthens our growing leadership position in HR Business Process Outsourcing. It also creates a new set of capabilities for us in the learning outsourcing segment while adding an additional revenue stream and new customers," said Steve Rolls, Convergys Executive Vice President, Global Customer Management and Employee Care. "Convergys had been working closely with DigitalThink as an alliance partner over the past several months. As a result of this strong relationship, DigitalThink became an attractive acquisition opportunity for us."
Convergys' outsourced learning capabilities will enable global organizations to improve skills and productivity for their workforce through web-based courses and simulation training.
With this acquisition, Convergys will:
offer a new set of capabilities to help the world's top organizations maximize the value of their internal and external customer relationships through customized, on-demand courses;
expand its capabilities in the HR Business Process Outsourcing market to meet the needs of large global organizations for full service learning solutions including consulting and course design, development, delivery, and administration; and
support its global HR and Customer Management clients more efficiently by accelerating the effectiveness of customer support teams through on-the-job training for client programs.
"We are excited to become a part of Convergys," said Michael Pope, President and CEO of DigitalThink. "Combining forces with Convergys will allow our customers to benefit from the broad Convergys Customer Management and Employee Care offerings, and Convergys' global client base will be able to leverage the strength of our talented employees and our extensive learning services offering."
DigitalThink is headquartered in San Francisco and has about 375 employees and many clients. Historically, EDS was the company's largest client, but as a result of a recent contract dispute, EDS is no longer a DigitalThink client.
DigitalThink's Board of Directors unanimously approved the acquisition by Convergys and signed voting agreements. Integrating the DigitalThink acquisition into Convergys will be approximately $0.02 dilutive to earnings in 2004 and neutral to accretive thereafter.
About DigitalThink
DigitalThink is the leader in custom e-learning for Fortune 1000 companies. It provides the right combination of courseware development, do-it-yourself capabilities, learning delivery, and industry-specific expertise. DigitalThink has served over 500 clients including ADP Dealer Services, BearingPoint, Circuit City, Kinko's, Mazda, and Red Hat.
About Convergys
Convergys Corporation (NYSE:CVG - News), a member of the S&P 500 and the Forbes' Platinum 400, is the global leader in integrated billing, employee care, and customer care services provided through outsourcing or licensing. We serve top companies in telecommunications, Internet, cable and broadband services, technology, financial services, and other industries in more than 40 countries. We also provide integrated, outsourced, human resource services to leading companies across a broad range of industries.
We bring together world-class resources, software, and expertise to help create valuable relationships between our clients and their customers and their employees. This commitment is validated by the more than 1.5 million individual bills our software produces each day to support more than 100 million subscribers, and by the more than 1.7 million separate customer and employee contacts we manage each day, both live and via electronic interaction.
Convergys® employs more than 55,000 people in 53 customer contact centers and in our data centers and other offices in the United States, Canada, Latin America, Europe, the Middle East, and Asia. Convergys is on the net at www.convergys.com, and has world headquarters in Cincinnati.
(Convergys and the Convergys logo are registered trademarks of Convergys Corporation.)
NOTE:
In connection with the proposed transaction, DigitalThink intends to file a proxy statement and other relevant materials with the Securities and Exchange Commission ("SEC"). BEFORE MAKING ANY VOTING DECISION WITH RESPECT TO THE PROPOSED TRANSACTION, INVESTORS AND STOCKHOLDERS OF DIGITALTHINK ARE URGED TO READ THE PROXY STATEMENT AND OTHER RELEVANT MATERIALS BECAUSE THEY WILL CONTAIN IMPORTANT INFORMATION ABOUT THE PROPOSED TRANSACTION. The proxy statement and other relevant materials, and any other documents filed by DigitalThink with the SEC, may be obtained free of charge at the SEC's web site at www.sec.gov. In addition, investors and stockholders of DigitalThink may obtain free copies of the documents filed with the SEC by contacting the Chief Financial Officer of DigitalThink at (415) 625-4076 or by writing to the Chief Financial Officer at DigitalThink, Inc., 601 Brannan Street, San Francisco, CA 94107. You may also read and copy any reports, statements, and other information filed by DigitalThink with the SEC at the SEC public reference room at 450 Fifth Street, NW, Room 1200, Washington, D.C. 20549. Please call the SEC at (800) SEC-0330 or visit the SEC's web site for further information on its public reference room.
DigitalThink and its executive officers and directors may be deemed to be participants in the solicitation of proxies from the DigitalThink stockholders in favor of the proposed transaction. Certain executive officers and directors of DigitalThink have interests in the proposed transaction that may differ from the interests of stockholders generally, including acceleration of vesting of stock options and continuation of director and officer insurance and indemnification. These interests will be described in the proxy statement when it becomes available.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Contact:
Convergys Corporation
Business and Financial Media, John Pratt
+1 513 723 3333 or +1 888 284 9900
or john.pratt@convergys.com
International FreeFone, access AT&T, then 1 888 284 9900
Trade Media
Patricia Johnson
+1 954 961 4307 or patricia.johnson@convergys.com
When asked during a pre trial deposition if the defendant would tell the truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth, the defendant responded with, "I don't know!" at which point the plaintiff's counsel insinuated that the defendant was refusing to take an oath to tell the truth.
The defendant responded with the statement that she was in fact willing to take the oath but "didn't know what the truth was anymore and therefore had truthfully answered the question".
Under objection the plaintiff's counsel then asked the judge to compel the defendant to take the oath whereafter the defendant responded with "yes, to the best of my ability" to the question.
Thereupon the judge was once again called in and asked the plaintiff's attorney what was going on. After much deliberation, the judge accepted the answer "yes, to the best of my ability" and ordered the deposition to proceed.
After the deposition was over, the defendant asked the court reporter this question off the record: "If I told you I was a compulsive liar would I be telling the truth?"
Will the testimony of the defendant be valid in any court of law?
Follow the debate at this link and thread:
http://www.investorshub.com/boards/read_msg.asp?message_id=2685537
When asked during a pre trial deposition if the defendant would tell the truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth, the defendant responded with, "I don't know!" at which point the plaintiff's counsel insinuated that the defendant was refusing to take an oath to tell the truth.
The defendant responded with the statement that she was in fact willing to take the oath but "didn't know what the truth was anymore and therefore had truthfully answered the question".
Under objection the plaintiff's counsel then asked the judge to compel the defendant to take the oath whereafter the defendant responded with "yes, to the best of my ability" to the question.
Thereupon the judge was once again called in and asked the plaintiff's attorney what was going on. After much deliberation, the judge accepted the answer "yes, to the best of my ability" and ordered the deposition to proceed.
After the deposition was over, the defendant asked the court reporter this question off the record: "If I told you I was a compulsive liar would I be telling the truth?"
Will the testimony of the defendant be valid in any court of law?
Follow the debate at this link and thread:
http://www.investorshub.com/boards/read_msg.asp?message_id=2685537
The only truth there is, is the truth made by the truth.
G! Alex Gabor
Interesting debate:
http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/truth-identity/
Nuclear Armistice Department
Foster Wheeler Secures Commitment for $120 Million of New Financing and Terminates Efforts to Divest European Assets
Thursday February 5, 7:01 am ET
Commitment is First Step of Company's Balance Sheet Restructuring
HAMILTON, Bermuda--(BUSINESS WIRE)--Feb. 5, 2004-- Foster Wheeler Ltd. (OTCBB: FWLRF - News) today announced actions in support of its goal to restructure the company's balance sheet. A number of institutional investors have committed to provide $120 million in new financing to the company to replace its current term loan and revolving credit facility. In addition, the company has discontinued its previously announced plans to divest one of its European operating units.
ADVERTISEMENT
The new financing will be in the form of senior secured notes due 2011, replacing the funded bank debt that is due in 2005. The institutional investors that have committed to participate in the new financing are also members of the ad hoc bondholders committee that is currently negotiating with the company on the terms of its proposed equity for debt exchange offer and that the company expects to participate in the exchange offer, pending finalization of terms and clearance by the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) and state securities commissions. The commitment for new financing is contingent upon the company completing such proposed equity for debt exchange and other customary conditions being met, in each case on terms satisfactory to the investors.
"We appreciate the interest that these investors are showing in Foster Wheeler through the commitment of this new capital and their willingness to consider exchanging existing debt for equity in the newly capitalized company," said Raymond J. Milchovich, chairman, president and chief executive officer. "This commitment represents the critical first step toward the completion of our balance sheet restructuring and is expected to provide important financial flexibility as we move ahead. We now look forward to the successful completion of our equity for debt exchange and the significant balance sheet improvement that is anticipated."
"During the past year we have seen a significant operational and financial turnaround of our North American operations," continued Mr. Milchovich. "This improvement combined with the anticipated financial benefits of the equity for debt exchange enables us to officially discontinue previously announced plans to divest one of our European operating units. Even though we received several attractive offers, we believe that the future Foster Wheeler portfolio is much stronger if we retain all of our existing businesses. Also, we no longer anticipate the need for the sale of a major asset in order to provide adequate domestic liquidity and complete our balance sheet restructuring. I am very pleased by these positive developments that have been enabled by the improvement in the company's operating performance."
The company has filed a registration statement with the SEC, which outlines certain proposed terms of the equity for debt exchange offer for certain of its securities. The closing of the exchange offer is subject to, among other things, clearance of the registration statement by the SEC and state securities commissions, and attaining certain minimum participation thresholds.
Notes to Editor:
1. Foster Wheeler Ltd. is a global company offering, through its subsidiaries, a broad range of design, engineering, construction, manufacturing, project development and management, research and plant operation services. Foster Wheeler serves the refining, oil and gas, petrochemical, chemicals, power, pharmaceuticals, biotechnology and healthcare industries. The corporation is based in Hamilton, Bermuda, and its operational headquarters are in Clinton, New Jersey, USA. For more information about Foster Wheeler, visit our Web site at www.fwc.com.
2. Safe Harbor Statement
This news release contains forward-looking statements that are based on management's assumptions, expectations and projections about the various industries within which the corporation operates. These include statements regarding our expectations regarding revenues (including as expressed by our backlog), liquidity, the outcome of litigation and legal proceedings and recoveries from customers for claims and the costs of current and future asbestos claims and the amount and timing of related insurance recoveries. Such forward-looking statements by their nature involve a degree of risk and uncertainty. The corporation cautions that a variety of factors, including but not limited to the following, could cause business conditions and results to differ materially from what is contained in forward-looking statements: changes in the rate of economic growth in the United States and other major international economies, changes in investment by the energy, power, oil and gas, pharmaceutical, chemical/petrochemical and environmental industries, changes in the financial condition of our customers, changes in regulatory environment, changes in project design or schedules, changes in estimates made by the company of costs to complete projects, contract cancellations, changes in trade, monetary and fiscal policies worldwide, currency fluctuations, outcomes of pending and future litigation, including litigation regarding our liability for damages and insurance coverage for asbestos exposure, protection and validity of patents and other intellectual property rights, increasing competition by foreign and domestic companies, changes in financial markets, war and/or terrorist attacks on facilities either owned or where equipment or services are or may be provided, compliance with debt covenants, monetization of certain power systems facilities, implementation of our restructuring plan, recoverability of claims against customers and others, changes in estimates used in critical accounting policies, and the outcome of cash-generation initiatives. Other factors and assumptions not identified above were also involved in the formation of these forward-looking statements and the failure of such other assumptions to be realized, as well as other factors, may also cause actual results to differ materially from those projected. Most of these factors are difficult to predict accurately and are generally beyond our control. You should consider the areas of risk described above in connection with any forward-looking statements that may be made by us.
3. Investors and security holders are urged to read the following documents filed with the SEC, as amended from time to time, relating to the proposed exchange offer because they contain important information: (1) the registration statement on Form S-4 (File No. 333-107054) and (2) the Schedule TO, when it is filed. These and any other documents relating to the proposed exchange offer, when they are filed with the SEC, may be obtained free at the SEC's Web site at www.sec.gov. You may also obtain each of these documents for free (when available) from Foster Wheeler by directing your request to: John A. Doyle; e-mail john_doyle@fwc.com; telephone 908-730-4270; and address Foster Wheeler Inc., Perryville Corporate Park, Clinton, NJ 08809-4000.
The foregoing reference to the proposed registered exchange offer and any other related transactions shall not constitute an offer to buy or exchange securities or constitute the solicitation of an offer to sell or exchange any securities in Foster Wheeler Ltd. or any of its subsidiaries.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Contact:
Foster Wheeler Ltd.
Media Contact:
Richard Tauberman, 908-730-4444
or
Investor Contact:
John Doyle, 908-730-4270
or
Other Inquiries:
908-730-4000
If I told you I was I compulsive liar would I be telling you the truth?
Alex S. Gabor
From his 1995 book, "Confessions of a Sex Crazed Money Man"
Why Legendary Investors Are Drowning in Cash
Thursday March 25, 6:00 am ET
By Gregg Wolper
Great investors tend not to jump in and out of the market based on where they think the Dow Jones Industrial Average will be in 12 months or whether they consider the S&P 500 slightly undervalued. They recognize that trying to time the market's ups and downs will more likely to lead to frustration than to long-term success. Ordinary investors would do well to have the same mind-set.
By the same token, when several of the very best managers all say they are having an extremely difficult time finding anything to buy at prices that make sense--not just in the U.S. stock market, but in the bond arena and foreign markets, too--it's worth paying attention. In fact, it's remarkable how many top-flight managers currently have more than 20% of assets in cash and say they find compelling opportunities scarce to nonexistent.
The most prominent cash-hog is Warren Buffett. He's not a mutual fund manager, but he does have to decide where to allocate the substantial pile of cash generated by Berkshire Hathaway's (brk.b.B) insurance businesses. Lately he has been putting that cash into... well, mostly nowhere. We've discussed Berkshire's recently released annual report elsewhere, so I won't go into detail here. Suffice it to say that at the end of 2003 the percentage of Berkshire Hathaway's total investments languishing in cash was 22%--up sharply from the single-digit levels of the previous four years. That adds up to roughly $31 billion sitting on the sidelines.
Buffett considered most stocks too expensive even in early 2003, when the market indexes were far lower than they stand now. As he said in Berkshire's 2002 annual report, released one year ago: "Despite three years of falling prices, which have significantly improved the attractiveness of common stocks, we still find very few that even mildly interest us." And stock prices have soared since then. Bond prices also leave him cold right now. In Berkshire's new annual report, he says the junk-bond arena, which he considered quite cheap in 2002, doesn't look that way anymore. "The pendulum swung quickly...," he writes, "and this sector now looks decidedly unattractive to us. Yesterday's weeds are today being priced as flowers."
Bob Rodriguez, a two-time winner of the Morningstar Manager of the Year award, also knows something about bonds--and about stocks, too. And like Buffett, he's keeping plenty of money off the table these days. Rodriguez has a flexible mandate with FPA Capital (Nasdaq:FPPTX - News); though stocks typically dominate that portfolio, he can look elsewhere, too. Lately he has found very little to his liking. At the end of February 2004, the fund's cash stake stood at nearly 26% of assets. That's not a first here--FPA Capital had roughly the same amount in cash in mid-1997. Still, it's rare for this fund to have more than 20% of assets sitting in cash.
In a mid-January 2004 letter to shareholders, Rodriguez explained that he and his colleagues have tried every which way to find attractive stocks, and have come up empty. "However we slice and dice Mr. Market," he wrote, "the result is the same, Slim Pickings." That goes for bonds, too. At FPA New Income (Nasdaq:FPNIX - News)--which, unlike FPA Capital, focuses on fixed-income securities--the fund's cash pile at the end of February was a staggering 38% of assets.
Managers Jean-Marie Eveillard and Charles de Vaulx of First Eagle Global (Nasdaq:SGENX - News), who also have a Morningstar Manager of the Year award to their credit, report similar troubles. Two weeks ago, de Vaulx told us that the lack of appealing, decently priced securities isn't limited to the U.S. stock market, but is widespread across asset classes and around the globe. Aside from a few small caps in Japan and Europe, he says he and Eveillard can't find anyplace to invest the fund's cash, which then stood at 23% of assets. And this for a fund that can freely invest in bonds, too. Sounding like Buffett, de Vaulx said high-yield bonds are overpriced now, too.
De Vaulx added that while bargains are scarce everywhere right now, the U.S. market is the most barren of all. As a result, First Eagle Global currently has a smaller percentage of assets devoted to U.S. stocks--less than 20%--than at any other time in the 25 years that Eveillard has been running the fund.
The list goes on. The cash-heavy club includes Clipper Fund (Nasdaq:CFIMX - News), run by other former Managers of the Year, and Longleaf Partners (Nasdaq:LLPFX - News), managed by past runners-up for that award. At year-end 2003, Jim Gipson, Michael Sandler, and the rest of Clipper's disciplined team had 26% of assets in cash and short-term notes. Meanwhile, at the end of February, Longleaf's Mason Hawkins, Staley Cates, and John Buford had 20.6% of Longleaf Partners' portfolio in cash. (The Longleaf trio also had nearly 19% of assets devoted to foreign securities--a rather high level even for those adventurous managers.)
When so many justly respected managers are sounding the same cautious note, it makes sense to listen. No need to overreact; don't shove all your money under the mattress. But take care if you've got a chunk of money to invest. Consider even more strongly than usual the option of putting it to work gradually--for example, dollar-cost averaging, or spacing investments out over time--rather than investing it in one fell swoop. Hesitate even more than usual if tempted to try to chase hot sectors. Even the greatest managers can't consistently predict the direction of the markets--and by and large, they don't try to. But right now, their words--and deeds--speak volumes.
http://biz.yahoo.com/ms/040325/105475_1.html
NY Fed Warns of Potential Deficit Fallout
Thursday March 25, 10:36 am ET
By Pedro Nicolaci da Costa
NEW YORK (Reuters) - A ballooning budget deficit and low savings rate pose risks to the U.S. economy and the financial system, New York Federal Reserve President Timothy Geithner said on Thursday.
"The current deterioration in the U.S. fiscal position and the acute decline in the net national savings rate represent risks to the financial system and the economy as a whole," Geithner told the New York Banker's Association.
Geithner said such looming risks were made all the more worrying by the size of the U.S. current account deficit and the unprecedented scale of financing needed to fund it.
The central banker urged the United States to strengthen risk management in an increasingly complex financial environment to guard against any eventualities.
He also noted that U.S. inflation was very low and the outlook was for only very modest prices rises ahead, but offered little in the way of hints on monetary policy in his first major speech since becoming NY Fed President.
GREENSPAN ON FARMS
Fed Chairman Alan Greenspan also refrained from using any language that might suggest the future direction of interest rates.
In a separate speech on Thursday, Greenspan said open global markets are needed to ensure that consumers worldwide enjoy the benefits of rapid gains in agricultural productivity.
Greenspan noted advances in farm productivity had brought wrenching changes over the years in the U.S. economy, as workers first migrated to manufacturing and more recently into service industries.
But he told the conference, sponsored by the Kansas City Federal Reserve Bank and the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development, that such "dislocations" were a worthwhile price to pay for the increases in living standards productivity brings.
Financial markets are awaiting speeches from Fed Board Governor Donald Kohn and St Louis Fed President William Poole for any clues regarding the timing of an eventual interest rate hike from the central bank.
On Wednesday, two Federal Reserve officials warned investors that loose monetary policy conditions will not last forever, particularly in light of robust U.S. economic growth.
Job creation has been the missing component in the U.S. economic recovery, and until it picks up in breadth and speed, the Fed has suggested, borrowing costs are likely to remain at 1 percent, their lowest level in 46 years.
Comcast Agrees to Purchase TechTV
Thursday March 25, 10:24 am ET
PHILADELPHIA, March 25 /PRNewswire/ -- Comcast Corporation (Nasdaq: CMCSA - News, CMCSK - News) announced today that it has signed an agreement with Vulcan Programming Inc. to acquire TechTV, Inc. Upon closing, Comcast will merge TechTV with G4, the Comcast-owned television network devoted to video games and the gamer lifestyle.
ADVERTISEMENT
Building on the complementary strengths of two niche programming networks that combine the worlds of technology and entertainment, the acquisition of TechTV would create a network that complements Comcast's growing content portfolio and expands G4's distribution. The combined channel would be available to 44 million cable and satellite customers nationwide.
Charles Hirschhorn, founder and CEO of G4, will be the CEO of the combined network. "This merger is a win for G4; a win for TechTV; and a win for our advertising and affiliate partners," said Hirschhorn. "The result will be one compelling TV channel that showcases the fun and entertaining side of games and technology with the distribution necessary to achieve broad appeal."
EchoStar Communications Corporation (Nasdaq: DISH - News) will have an equity interest in the combined entity and has agreed to make the channel available to its DISH Network customers who subscribe to its mid-level America's Top 120 programming package or greater.
The transaction is subject to customary closing conditions and regulatory approvals. Financial terms were not disclosed.
Launched in 2002, G4 is currently seen in 15 million cable homes nationwide and was created for the 145 million gamers in the United States who spend upwards of $11 billion annually on video games. TechTV, previously known as Ziff-Davis TV (ZDTV), was launched in 1998, was purchased by Vulcan Programming Inc. in 2000 and is now available in 43 million homes in the United States.
About G4
Headquartered in Los Angeles, G4 (www.g4tv.com) is the premier 24/7 television network devoted to the world of video games and the people who play them. Geared toward viewers aged 12-34, G4 is the leading source of entertainment and information about everything game - from video to online to computer to wireless. The network airs in 13.3 million homes in 47 of the top 50 DMA's nationwide on Comcast, Time Warner, Cox, Insight, Mediacom, Bright House Networks and RCN cable systems. Launched in 2002, G4 is owned by Comcast Corporation.
About TechTV
TechTV is the category-defining cable and satellite network that showcases the smart, edgy and unexpected side of technology. By telling stories through the prism of technology, TechTV intrigues viewers with everything from help and information to cutting-edge factual programming and outrageous late-night fun. TechTV viewers are highly interactive and passionate about engaging in the television experience and log a monthly average of 1.8 million unique visitors to TechTV.com. TechTV is currently available in more than 43 million homes in the United States and distributes content to more than 70 countries.
About Comcast
Comcast Corporation (Nasdaq: CMCSA - News, CMCSK - News; www.comcast.com) is principally involved in the development, management and operation of broadband cable networks and in the provision of programming content. The Company is the largest cable company in the United States, serving more than 21 million cable subscribers. The Company's content businesses include majority ownership of Comcast Spectacor, Comcast SportsNet, E! Entertainment Television, Style Network, The Golf Channel, Outdoor Life Network and G4. Comcast Class A common stock and Class A Special common stock trade on The NASDAQ Stock Market under the symbols CMCSA and CMCSK, respectively.
"Safe Harbor" Statement under the Private Securities Litigation Reform Act of 1995: Statements in this press release regarding Comcast Corporation which are not historical facts are "forward-looking statements" that involve risks and uncertainties. For a discussion of such risks and uncertainties, which could cause actual results to differ from those contained in the forward- looking statements, see "Risk Factors" in the Comcast Corporation's Annual Report or Form 10-K for the most recently ended fiscal year.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Source: Comcast Corporation
Comcast to buy TechTV, merge it with game channel
Thursday March 25, 10:39 am ET
NEW YORK, March 25 (Reuters) - Comcast Corp. (NasdaqNM:CMCSA - News), the largest U.S. cable company, on Thursday said it would buy TechTV, the cable channel devoted to the technology industry, from Vulcan Programming.
Financial terms of the deal were not disclosed.
The company, which launched an unsolicited bid for Walt Disney Co. (NYSE:DIS - News) last month, plans to combine the channel with its G4 network, which is devoted to video games.
http://biz.yahoo.com/rc/040325/media_comcast_1.html
Comcast to buy TechTV, merge it with game channel
Thursday March 25, 10:39 am ET
NEW YORK, March 25 (Reuters) - Comcast Corp. (NasdaqNM:CMCSA - News), the largest U.S. cable company, on Thursday said it would buy TechTV, the cable channel devoted to the technology industry, from Vulcan Programming.
Financial terms of the deal were not disclosed.
The company, which launched an unsolicited bid for Walt Disney Co. (NYSE:DIS - News) last month, plans to combine the channel with its G4 network, which is devoted to video games.
http://biz.yahoo.com/rc/040325/media_comcast_1.html
Comcast Agrees to Purchase TechTV
/FROM PR NEWSWIRE PHILADELPHIA 800-523-4424/
TO BUSINESS AND ENTERTAINMENT EDITORS:
Comcast Agrees to Purchase TechTV
PHILADELPHIA, March 25 /PRNewswire/ -- Comcast Corporation
(Nasdaq: CMCSA, CMCSK) announced today that it has signed an agreement with
Vulcan Programming Inc. to acquire TechTV, Inc. Upon closing, Comcast will
merge TechTV with G4, the Comcast-owned television network devoted to video
games and the gamer lifestyle.
Building on the complementary strengths of two niche programming networks
that combine the worlds of technology and entertainment, the acquisition of
TechTV would create a network that complements Comcast's growing content
portfolio and expands G4's distribution. The combined channel would be
available to 44 million cable and satellite customers nationwide.
Charles Hirschhorn, founder and CEO of G4, will be the CEO of the combined
network. "This merger is a win for G4; a win for TechTV; and a win for our
advertising and affiliate partners," said Hirschhorn. "The result will be one
compelling TV channel that showcases the fun and entertaining side of games
and technology with the distribution necessary to achieve broad appeal."
EchoStar Communications Corporation (Nasdaq: DISH) will have an equity
interest in the combined entity and has agreed to make the channel available
to its DISH Network customers who subscribe to its mid-level America's Top 120
programming package or greater.
The transaction is subject to customary closing conditions and regulatory
approvals. Financial terms were not disclosed.
Launched in 2002, G4 is currently seen in 15 million cable homes
nationwide and was created for the 145 million gamers in the United States who
spend upwards of $11 billion annually on video games. TechTV, previously
known as Ziff-Davis TV (ZDTV), was launched in 1998, was purchased by Vulcan
Programming Inc. in 2000 and is now available in 43 million homes in the
United States.
About G4
Headquartered in Los Angeles, G4 (www.g4tv.com) is the premier 24/7
television network devoted to the world of video games and the people who play
them. Geared toward viewers aged 12-34, G4 is the leading source of
entertainment and information about everything game - from video to online to
computer to wireless. The network airs in 13.3 million homes in 47 of the top
50 DMA's nationwide on Comcast, Time Warner, Cox, Insight, Mediacom, Bright
House Networks and RCN cable systems. Launched in 2002, G4 is owned by
Comcast Corporation.
About TechTV
TechTV is the category-defining cable and satellite network that showcases
the smart, edgy and unexpected side of technology. By telling stories through
the prism of technology, TechTV intrigues viewers with everything from help
and information to cutting-edge factual programming and outrageous late-night
fun. TechTV viewers are highly interactive and passionate about
engaging in the television experience and log a monthly average of 1.8 million
unique visitors to TechTV.com. TechTV is currently available in more than
43 million homes in the United States and distributes content to more than
70 countries.
About Comcast
Comcast Corporation (Nasdaq: CMCSA, CMCSK) (www.comcast.com) is
principally involved in the development, management and operation of broadband
cable networks and in the provision of programming content. The Company is
the largest cable company in the United States, serving more than 21 million
cable subscribers. The Company's content businesses include majority
ownership of Comcast Spectacor, Comcast SportsNet, E! Entertainment
Television, Style Network, The Golf Channel, Outdoor Life Network and G4.
Comcast Class A common stock and Class A Special common stock trade on The
NASDAQ Stock Market under the symbols CMCSA and CMCSK, respectively.
"Safe Harbor" Statement under the Private Securities Litigation Reform Act
of 1995: Statements in this press release regarding Comcast Corporation which
are not historical facts are "forward-looking statements" that involve risks
and uncertainties. For a discussion of such risks and uncertainties, which
could cause actual results to differ from those contained in the forward-
looking statements, see "Risk Factors" in the Comcast Corporation's Annual
Report or Form 10-K for the most recently ended fiscal year.
SOURCE Comcast Corporation
/CONTACT: Jenni Moyer, Comcast Corporation, +1-215-851-3311; or
David Shane, G4, +1-310-979-5015/
/Web site: http://www.g4tv.com /
/Web site: http://www.comcast.com /
The Shadowy Story Behind Scientology's Tax-Exempt Status
On Oct. 8, 1993, 10,000 cheering Scientologists thronged the Los Angeles Sports Arena to celebrate the most important milestone in the church's recent history: victory in its all-out war against the Internal Revenue Service.
For 25 years, IRS agents had branded Scientology a commercial enterprise and refused to give it the tax exemption granted to churches. The refusals had been upheld in every court. But that night the crowd learned of an astonishing turnaround. The IRS had granted tax exemptions to every Scientology entity in the United States.
"The war is over," David Miscavige, the church's leader, declared to tumultuous applause.
The landmark reversal shocked tax experts and saved the church tens of millions of dollars in taxes. More significantly, the decision was an invaluable public relations tool in Scientology's worldwide campaign for acceptance as a mainstream religion.
On the basis of the IRS ruling, the State Department formally criticized Germany for discriminating against Scientologists. The German government regards the organization as a business, not a tax-exempt religion, the very position maintained for 25 years by the U.S. government.
The full story of the turnabout by the IRS has remained hidden behind taxpayer privacy laws for nearly four years. But an examination by The New York Times found that the exemption followed a series of unusual internal IRS actions that came after an extraordinary campaign orchestrated by Scientology against the agency and people who work there. Among the findings of the review by The New York Times, based on more than 30 interviews and thousands of pages of public and internal church records, were these:
http://www-2.cs.cmu.edu/~dst/Cowen/essays/nytimes.html
The Shadowy Story Behind Scientology's Tax-Exempt Status
Will Scientologists now take on the SEC and get involved in the political process to "Clear America" of corruption?
On Oct. 8, 1993, 10,000 cheering Scientologists thronged the Los Angeles Sports Arena to celebrate the most important milestone in the church's recent history: victory in its all-out war against the Internal Revenue Service.
For 25 years, IRS agents had branded Scientology a commercial enterprise and refused to give it the tax exemption granted to churches. The refusals had been upheld in every court. But that night the crowd learned of an astonishing turnaround. The IRS had granted tax exemptions to every Scientology entity in the United States.
"The war is over," David Miscavige, the church's leader, declared to tumultuous applause.
The landmark reversal shocked tax experts and saved the church tens of millions of dollars in taxes. More significantly, the decision was an invaluable public relations tool in Scientology's worldwide campaign for acceptance as a mainstream religion.
On the basis of the IRS ruling, the State Department formally criticized Germany for discriminating against Scientologists. The German government regards the organization as a business, not a tax-exempt religion, the very position maintained for 25 years by the U.S. government.
The full story of the turnabout by the IRS has remained hidden behind taxpayer privacy laws for nearly four years. But an examination by The New York Times found that the exemption followed a series of unusual internal IRS actions that came after an extraordinary campaign orchestrated by Scientology against the agency and people who work there. Among the findings of the review by The New York Times, based on more than 30 interviews and thousands of pages of public and internal church records, were these:
http://www-2.cs.cmu.edu/~dst/Cowen/essays/nytimes.html
Hartcourt Courting Preston Gates?
Is Hartcourt getting sued by the SEC and what does Preston Gates have to do with the company?
Bringing the SEC under Investor Control?
100 million investors chipping in $1.00 each might cover the cost of bringing down the SEC, but it would cost half that much just to organize the investors to collect it, and the other half would have to go to a good bunch of lawyers just to take on the case which would take about a decade to handle the 37 million plus pages of documents needing to be brought before the Supreme Court, so you are correct, you are kidding yourself and anyone who reads your post. There is no evidence anywhere we can find that suggests that anyone has ever sued the SEC and won. But there are alternatives to using force and the current court system young Jedi Knight.
Miserable Failure
Using a technique called "Google bombing," Internet jokesters have been engaging in political mischief-making again. Go to Google, type in "miserable failure," and then click on "I'm Feeling Lucky." And while you're at it, do the same with "french military victories" and "weapons of mass destruction."
The Second Amendment is now moot. The Fourth Amendment was usurped by the Patriot Act. What would you like to do about it?
Predictions of collapse of Philippine economy, Afghanistan bloodshed will lead to limited nuclear war in middle east, and Iran will invade Iraq within a year.
Will the 911 Victims Sue the United States Government instead of the Saudi's for $1 trillion or just joinder the government in that action?
How do you go about starting the impeachment process?
The President, Vice President and all civil officers of the United States, shall be removed from office on impeachment for, and conviction of, treason, bribery, or other high crimes and misdemeanors.
--U.S. Constitution, Article 2, Section 4
Does offering Turkey $8 billion in aide and loans to allow the US to use it as a base to invade Iraq under false pretenses constitute bribery?
Bush May Not Be KO'd Yet, but he's definitely got his gloves off and has lost most of his clothing.
Let the Choir Sing
Bush Ready in the Ring
No Pictures Please, the Emperor Has No Clothing Any More
http://play.rbn.com/?url=livecon/kcrw/g2demand/ls/ls040321le_Show.rm&start=13:56&proto=rtsp
"Osama bin Laden Found Dead, Autopsy shows he died before 911"
Connect the Military Industrial Financial Media Complex Dots:
http://www.conspiracydigest.com/carlyle_group.html
http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/article3995.htm
"A 1-megaton air burst could kill everyone within a radius of 7 km from the hypocentre."
http://www.fas.org/nuke/control/icj/text/ianw_ijudgment_19960708_dissenting_koroma.htm
A 1 megaton nuclear bomb can now be carried on the back of one human suicide bomber.
In other news the lesson to be learned is never issue any press releases about public companies until after the fact of any event is totally completed.
http://www.investorshub.com/boards/read_msg.asp?message_id=2681538
http://www.investorshub.com/boards/read_msg.asp?message_id=2679778
The Rolling Blog of GAG - Initials of the Hornblower. Everyone else just keep blowing your whistles until the reign stops and we have slayed the dragon at the gates.
Datascension Inc. Mandatory Certificate Exchange Progressing
LAS VEGAS, Feb 13, 2004 (BUSINESS WIRE) -- The mandatory stock certificate exchange for Datascension Inc., (OTCBB:DTSNV), formerly known as Nutek, Inc. is progressing as planned.
Many certificates have already been received by Datascension's transfer agent, Transfer Online, Inc., to start processing the exchange for certificates bearing the new CUSIP number, Company name and the beneficial owner's name. The first round of certificates is expected to be mailed to shareholders and brokers next week.
Datascension instituted the mandatory certificate exchange as it changed its name from Nutek, Inc. to Datascension Inc., its CUSIP number to 238111108 and trading symbol to DTSN on January 26, 2004.
Concurrently, the Company's trading temporarily changed to a "when issued" status, symbolized by a "V" added to the end of the ticker symbol, to alert and allow sufficient time for brokerages, clearing houses and investors to exchange the Company's stock certificates for new certificates bearing the new Company name, CUSIP number and names of the beneficial owners. (Brokers: please refer to NASDAQ's January 30, 2004 UNIFORM PRACTICE ADVISORY UPC # 015-2004) While the stock is in a "when issued" status, the SEC T+3 requirement for settlement of trades within three business days is suspended. As soon as the "when issued" status is removed, the "V" will be removed from the ticker symbol and all unsettled trades will require immediate settlement. All trades will then be required to comply with T+3 settlement rules.
NASDAQ will lift Datascension Inc.'s "when issued" status when certificates representing a sufficient number of shares have been exchanged. The timing of this is entirely dependent upon how quickly the stock certificates are sent in for exchange. The Company has spoken with the National Association of Securities Dealers (NASD) and the situation is being monitored so as to insure compliance with these rules and the timely removal of the "V" from the ticker symbol.
"The 'when issued' status is one of many positive happenings occurring in the Company," explained Murray Conradie, CEO of Datascension Inc. "Our name change to Datascension Inc., illustrates our move to focus on a single industry that has proven to be profitable. Nutek, Inc., now Datascension, Inc., has been profitable for the past eight consecutive quarters, primarily due to the Datascension International subsidiary's data collection and market research business. Additionally, we've been meticulously executing our strategic growth plan to increase shareholder value, recently opening a new facility in the Dominican Republic and expanding our call center facility in Costa Rica. These actions enable us to accommodate new data collection and market research business we've already contracted and to provide capacity for further growth."
As part of the name change, CUSIP number change and ticker symbol change, all issued and outstanding shares of Nutek's current common stock MUST be exchanged for new certificates bearing the name Datascension Inc., and the name of the beneficial owner, or these shares will be void, shall not entitle the certificate holder to any of the rights of a shareholder of the Corporation, and shall be deemed worthless, non-transferable and non-tradable in any public or private market or exchange after April 25, 2004.
"We thank our shareholders, the transfer agent, and the brokerage community for their continued patience and support during the mandatory certificate exchange procedure," noted Conradie. "We understand that this is a time-consuming task for all involved, but it is a necessary part of our effort to protect and enhance shareholder value and grow the company with a singular focus."
STOCK CERTIFICATE EXCHANGE PROCEDURE FOR STOCKHOLDERS
Stockholders who have in their possession paper stock certificates should read and carefully complete the Letter of Transmittal, which is available online at http://www.nutk.com/5/transletter.htm. This letter is also available by fax or U.S. Mail by calling 866-242-2405. The completed Letter of Transmittal must then be forwarded together with the stock certificate(s) via an insured, traceable delivery service to the Company's transfer agent, Transfer Online, Inc., 227 SW Pine Street, Suite 300, Portland, OR 97204. Tel: 503-227-2950 Fax: 503-227-6874. Note that there is no need to, and nor should, stockholders endorse the back of the stock certificate.
Stockholders who hold their shares in street name with a broker are urged to immediately confirm with their broker that the broker is including their name on the list of beneficial owners being submitted to the Company's transfer agent. These stockholders will not be required to take any further action, unless their broker instructs them otherwise. The Company urges stockholders to make all requests in writing to their broker and keep a record of all communication.
PROCEDURE FOR SHAREHOLDERS EXPERIENCING PROBLEMS WITH THEIR BROKERAGE RELATING TO DATASCENSION'S STOCK
Shareholders are advised to have all Datascension-related communication with their brokers in writing. Written correspondence is the only proof of what is communicated between brokers and shareholders. If shareholders experience problems with their brokerage related to Datascension's stock, they should submit an explanation of the problem along with copies of their written correspondence regarding the matter directly to the company by email to share.exchange@datascension.com , by fax to 702-262-0033 or US mail to Datascension Inc, 6330 McLeod Drive, Suite 1, Las Vegas, NV 89120. Datascension can only attempt to assist those who provide copies of written correspondence.
CERTIFICATE EXCHANGE PROCEDURE FOR BROKERAGES
In conjunction with NASDAQ Uniform Practice Advisory UPC # 015-2004 noted above, the Company advises broker dealers with customers that hold Nutek, Inc. stock to promptly request from the Depository Trust Company (DTC) stock certificates representing the number of shares, which reflect their ownership position, and to submit the certificates along with the beneficial owner information, as described in the Letter of Transmittal. Broker dealers should contact DTC directly for instructions on withdrawing their position. The number of shares represented by the certificates and delivered to the transfer agent must match exactly the number of shares held by the beneficial owners or this will delay processing.
PROCEDURE FOR BROKERAGES WHO HAVE QUESTIONS OR ARE EXPERIENCING PROBLEMS RELATING TO TRADING DATASCENSION'S STOCK
Brokers are advised to submit in writing a detailed explanation of the problem or questions they have related to Datascension's stock to our Investor Relations contacts. Datascension can only attempt to assist those who provide written correspondence.
Safe Harbor Statement under the Private Securities Litigation Reform Act of 1995: Certain statements contained in this press release are forward-looking statements and information relating to the Company that is based on the beliefs of the management of the Company, as well as assumptions made by and information currently available to the management of the Company. Such statements reflect the current views of the Company with respect to future events, and are subject to risks and uncertainties that could cause actual results to differ materially from those contemplated in such forward-looking statements. The Company does not undertake any obligation to publicly release any revisions to these forward-looking statements to reflect events or circumstances after the date hereof or to reflect the occurrence of unanticipated events.
SOURCE: Datascension Inc.
(Voluntary Disclosure: Current Position- None;)
Forecast of Rising Oil Demand Challenges Tired Saudi Fields
By JEFF GERTH
Published: February 24, 2004
When visitors tour the headquarters of Saudi Arabia's oil empire, a sleek glass building rising from the desert in Dhahran near the Persian Gulf, they are reminded of its mission in a film projected on a giant screen. "We supply what the world demands every day," it declares.
For decades, that has largely been true. Ever since its rich reserves were discovered more than a half-century ago, Saudi Arabia has pumped the oil needed to keep pace with rising needs, becoming the mainstay of the global energy markets.
But the country's oil fields now are in decline, prompting industry and government officials to raise serious questions about whether the kingdom will be able to satisfy the world's thirst for oil in coming years.
Energy forecasts call for Saudi Arabia to almost double its output in the next decade and after. Oil executives and government officials in the United States and Saudi Arabia, however, say capacity will probably stall near current levels, potentially creating a significant gap in the global energy supply.
Outsiders have not had access to detailed production data from Saudi Aramco, the state-owned oil company, for more than 20 years. But interviews in recent months with experts on Saudi oil fields provided a rare look inside the business and suggested looming problems.
An internal Saudi Aramco plan, the experts said, estimates total production capacity in 2011 at 10.15 million barrels a day, about the current capacity. But to meet expected world demand, the United States Department of Energy's research arm says Saudi Arabia will need to produce 13.6 million barrels a day by 2010 and 19.5 million barrels a day by 2020.
"In the past, the world has counted on Saudi Arabia," one senior Saudi oil executive said. "Now I don't see how long it can be maintained."
Saudi Arabia, the leading exporter for three decades, is not running out of oil. Industry officials are finding, however, that it is becoming more difficult or expensive to extract it. Today, the country produces about eight million barrels a day, roughly one-tenth of the world's needs. It is the top foreign supplier to the United States, the world's leading energy consumer.
Fears of a future energy gap could, of course, turn out to be unfounded. Predictions of oil market behavior have often proved wrong.
But if Saudi production falls short, industry experts say the consequences could be significant. Other large producers, like Russia and Iraq, do not have Saudi Aramco's huge reserves or excess oil capacity to export, and promising new fields elsewhere are not expected to deliver enough oil to make up the difference.
As a result, supplies could tighten and oil prices could increase. The global economy could feel the ripples; previous spikes in oil prices have helped cause recessions, though high oil prices in the last year or so have not slowed strong growth.
Saudi Aramco says its dominance in world oil markets will grow because, "if required," it can expand its capacity to 12 million barrels a day or more by "making necessary investments," according to written responses to questions submitted by The New York Times.
But some experts are skeptical. Edward O. Price Jr., a former top Saudi Aramco and Chevron executive and a leading United States government adviser, says he believes that Saudi Arabia can pump up to 12 million barrels a day "for a few years." But "the world should not expect more from the Saudis," he said. He expects global oil markets to be in short supply by 2015.
Fatih Birol, the chief economist for the International Energy Agency, said the Saudis would not be able to increase production enough for future needs without large-scale foreign investment.
The I.E.A., an independent agency founded by energy-consuming nations, and Washington see investment in energy exploration and field maintenance as vital, but such proposals face strong opposition inside Saudi Arabia. Tensions with the West, particularly the United States, make such investment politically difficult for Saudi society. For example, an effort by Crown Prince Abdullah, the kingdom's de facto ruler, to encourage Western companies to invest $25 billion in his country's natural gas industry essentially collapsed last year.
"Access to Persian Gulf oil reserves, especially Saudi Arabia's, is the key question for the whole world," Dr. Birol said.
President Bush has said he wants to make the United States less reliant on oil-producing countries that "don't like America" by diversifying suppliers and financing research into hydrogen fuel cells, but achieving that remains far off.
His administration backs foreign investment initiatives in the gulf region, including Saudi Arabia, and his energy policies rely on Energy Department projections showing the world even more dependent on Arabian oil in 20 years. That may be enough time for governments to find alternatives, but oil field development requires years of planning and work.
Publicly, Saudi oil executives express optimism about the future of their industry. Some economists are equally optimistic that if oil prices rise high enough, advanced recovery techniques will be applied, averting supply problems.
But privately, some Saudi oil officials are less sanguine.
"We don't see us as the ones making sure the oil is there for the rest of the world," one senior executive said in an interview. A Saudi Aramco official cautioned that even the attempt to get up to 12 million barrels a day would "wreak havoc within a decade," by causing damage to the oil fields.
In an unusual public statement, Sadad al-Husseini, Saudi Aramco's second-ranking executive and its leading geologist, warned at an oil conference in Jakarta in 2002 that global "natural declines in existing capacity are real and must be replaced."
Dr. al-Husseini, one Western oil expert said, has been "the brains of Saudi Aramco's exploration and production." But he has told associates that he plans to resign soon, and his departure, government oil experts in the United States and Saudi Arabia say, could hinder Saudi efforts to bolster production or entice foreign investment.
Saudi Arabia's reported proven reserves, more than 250 billion barrels, are one-fourth of the world's total. The most significant is Ghawar. Discovered in 1948, the 300-mile-long sliver near the Persian Gulf is the world's largest oil field and accounts for more than half of the kingdom's production.
The company told The New York Times that its field production practices, including those at Ghawar, were "at optimum levels" and the risk of steep declines was negligible. But Mr. Price, the former vice president for exploration and production at Saudi Aramco, says that North Ghawar, the most valuable section of the field, was pushed too hard in the past.
"Instead of spreading the production to other fields or areas," Mr. Price said, the Saudis concentrated on North Ghawar. That "accelerated the depletion rate and the time to uncontrolled decline," or the point where the field's production drops dramatically, he said.
In Saudi Arabia, seawater is injected into the giant fields to help move the oil toward the top of the reservoir. But over time, the volume of water that is lifted along with the oil increases, and the volume of oil declines proportionally. Eventually, it becomes uneconomical to extract the oil. There is also a risk that the field can become unstable and collapse.
Ghawar is still far too productive to abandon. But because of increasing problems with managing the water, one Saudi oil executive said, "Ghawar is becoming very costly to maintain."
The average decline rate in Saudi Aramco's mature fields — Ghawar and a few others — "is in the range of 8 percent per year," without additional remediation, according to the company's statement. This means several hundred thousand barrels of daily oil production would have to be added every year just to make up for the diminished output.
Every oil field is unique, and experts cannot predict how long each might last. For its part, Saudi Aramco is counting on Ghawar for years to come.
The company projects that Ghawar will continue to produce more than half its oil. One internal company estimate from 2002 puts Ghawar's production at 5.25 million barrels a day in 2011, more than half the total expected crude oil capacity of 10.15 million, according to United States government officials and oil executives.
"The big risk in Saudi Arabia is that Ghawar's rate of decline increases to an alarming point," said Ali Morteza Samsam Bakhtiari, a senior official with the National Iranian Oil Company. "That will set bells ringing all over the oil world because Ghawar underpins Saudi output and Saudi undergirds worldwide production."
The I.E.A. warned in November that huge investments would be needed to offset the decline rates in mature Middle Eastern oil fields — it put the average at 5 percent — and the increasing costs of oil and gas production. The agency, based in Paris, forecasts that Saudi production will need to reach 20 million barrels a day by 2020. (I.E.A. and other research estimates say that more than 90 percent of that would be crude oil; the rest would be liquid products like natural gas liquids that result from the processing of crude oil.)
In his speech in Jakarta, Dr. al-Husseini noted the need for exploration, pointing out that colleagues at Exxon Mobil predict that more than 50 percent of oil and gas consumption in 2010 must come from new fields and reservoirs.
Harry A. Longwell, the executive vice president of Exxon Mobil, says finding new sources of oil is crucial. Mr. Longwell, in an interview, said that increasing demand and declining production were not new problems, but they were "much larger now because of the world's demand for energy and the magnitude of the numbers now are much larger."
To offset its declines, Saudi Aramco is bringing back into production one idle field, Qatif, and is enhancing production at a nearby offshore field, Abu Safah. The company says that with expert management, these fields will produce about 800,000 barrels a day.
But current and former Saudi Aramco executives question those expectations, contending that the goal of 500,000 barrels a day for Qatif is unrealistic and that development costs are higher than anticipated.
Qatif poses real difficulties. It is near housing for Saudi Arabia's minority Shiite population and contains high concentrations of hydrogen sulfide, a highly toxic gas. Its development is "particularly challenging," according to a technical paper by Saudi Aramco engineers presented last year in Bahrain, which said that 45 percent of potential drilling sites "were rejected due to safety concerns."
At Abu Safah, Saudi Aramco has experienced increasing water problems as it has turned to submersible pumps to extract oil. Experts, including American and Saudi government officials, say the technique is ill advised. Saudi Aramco, in its written response to questions, defended the use of the pumps at Abu Safah and its ability to manage the water after 37 years of production.
One United Sates government energy expert noted that "submersible pumps is what the Soviets went to on an indiscriminate basis in West Siberia and it went south." Samotlor, a huge field in Siberia, once produced more than three million barrels a day, but it declined sharply in the 1980's after the Soviets pushed it too hard. Today it produces only a few hundred thousand barrels a day.
Heading to a penny despite the word battles?:
http://www.otcbb.com/asp/quotes.asp?Sort=4&Quotes=usxp&Bullet.x=31&Bullet.y=8