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.
Bank scam may originate from Russia
Munir Kotadia
ZDNet UK
October 27, 2003, 15:10 GMT
Emails attempting to trick customers out of their bank account details could be a Russian version of the 419 email scam, according to a security expert
A criminal element from Russia may be responsible for the recent spate of spoof emails that have attempted to con online-banking customers into revealing their account details.
Over the past month, Internet banking customers of Barclays, Lloyds TSB, Halifax and more recently, NatWest, have received emails that appear to be from their bank, asking them to confirm their personal details. The emails contain a hyperlink that takes the unsuspecting user to what looks like their bank's official Web site, but has actually been set up by a third party in order to collect details that could be used fraudulently.
The scam is reminiscent of the infamous "419" scam emails, where the scammer offers large sums of money in exchange for assistance with transferring funds out of Nigeria or other countries, but experts believe that the new frauds originate from Russia.
Pete Simpson, ThreatLab manager at software security company Clearswift, told ZDNet UK that although there is still no solid evidence that the Russians are behind the emails, a significant number of the scams have been originating from the same source. "They appear to be coming out of Russia via an ISP in New Zealand at the minute, but that can switch any time," said Simpson. He said that the new scams are more organised than the 419 scams, representing "a concerted project as opposed to the odd fishing expedition."
The scammers are getting more creative in order to fool people into handing over valuable information, Simpson said, giving an example of a recent suspicious email disguised as a lucrative job offer. The email says that a total of 12 candidates have been short listed for a highly-paid job, but the recipient is offered the "first bite of the cherry" if they respond.
Simpson said that the recent bank scam emails will only be able to cause problems if people respond to them right away. "They tend to be short-lived affairs because if they get someone, the chances are that people will spot it and take various steps to shut the Web site down in a matter of hours," he said.
Because the emails are sent to so many people, it only takes a few responses to make the scam profitable, Simpson said. "There are a small number of people that will fall for it, but you only need a small return to make it worth while," he said.
http://news.zdnet.co.uk/internet/security/0,39020375,39117413,00.htm
Barclays scam email exploits new IE flaw
Matthew Broersma
ZDNet UK
January 12, 2004, 12:40 GMT
Con artists have begun using an address-hiding flaw to trick Barclays' online banking customers into revealing their personal details
Customers of Barclays and other UK banks have been targeted by fraud emails that exploit a recently discovered vulnerability in Internet Explorer allowing attackers to disguise Web addresses, according to security experts.
The Barclays scam email appears to come from the bank, and directs customers to a site posing as Barclays' online banking Web site, ibank.barclays.co.uk. The scam site then asks people to enter their banking details. Other scam emails appearing during the weekend also used this technique, known as "phishing", along with the same IE bug. The organisations targeted include Citibank, Lloyds and PayPal.
Banking scam emails are nothing new, but the use of the IE flaw represents an innovation, according to Internet services firm Netcraft, which analysed the Barclays message.
"As part of our continuing commitment to protect your account and to reduce the instance of fraud on our Web site, we are undertaking a period review of our member accounts," the scam email reads. "You are requested to visit our site by following the link given below. This is required for us to continue to offer you a safe and risk free environment to send and receive money online, and maintain the Barclays IBank Experience."
The bank last week warned users not to reply to any such emails or follow links that they contain. "Barclays is in no way involved with this scam email and the Web site does not belong to us," the bank said in a security alert on its site. "Barclays does not send emails to customers requesting your security or any other confidential information."
The bank is requesting users to forward fraud emails to internetsecurity@barclays.co.uk.
The email uses a glitch discovered last month that allows a specially crafted URL to load a browser window that appears to be displaying any address the attacker wants.
For example, the source code of the Barclays fraud email contains the link:
http://ibank.barclays.co.uk%01%01%01%01%01%01%01%01%01%01%
01%01%01%01%01%01%01%01%01%01%01%01%01%01%01%01%01%01
%01%01%01%01%01%01%01%01%01%01%01%01%01%01%01%01%01%01
%01%01%01%01%01%01%01%01%01%01%01%01%01%01%01%01%01%01
%01%01%01%01%01%01%01%01%01%01%01%01%01%01%01%01%01%01
%01%01%01%01%01%01@%77%77%77%2E%6E%65%77%79%65%72%73%6
D%2E%63%6F%6D:%38%30/%31%2C%2C%6C%6F%67%6F%6E%2C%30%30%
2E %70%68%70
In Internet Explorer, this is designed to display the address "ibank.barclays.co.uk" while actually directing users to a site, now offline, that was hosted by Affinity Internet. The characters such as "%01" encode the real address, which is "http://www.newyersm.com:80/1%2c%2clogon%2c00.php".
The flaw has the potential to undermine users' ability to determine what they should trust, eEye security research engineer Drew Copley said at the time of its discovery.
"If [the address is] appearing legitimate like that, you can get people to download anything, run anything, or get a password or whatever," he explained.
http://www.zdnet.co.uk/zdnetuk/news/internet/security/0,39020375,39119033,00.htm
Phishing scam 'most devious ever'
Andrew Colley
ZDNet Australia
March 03, 2004, 09:00 GMT
An email attempting to trick Australian online-banking customers into divulging their details has been labelled the most 'devious' example that an antivirus vendor has encountered
A prominent antivirus vendor has described the latest email fraud scheme targeted at Westpac bank customers as the most "devious" the company has ever encountered.
The email, distributed en-masse to Westpac customers, represents the latest example of "phishing scams," designed to catch the unwary and fool them into divulging their online-banking security details.
Typically, phishing scam emails appear to have been sent from the victim's bank, and contain a link to a fake version of the bank's Web site and instructions to log on to the site to verify their credentials with the bank.
Rob Forsyth, managing director at anti-virus vendor Sophos, believes that the techniques used by online confidence tricksters in the latest Westpac email indicate the scheme is reaching new heights of sophistication.
According to Sophos, the scammers have become better impostors, incorporating phrasing and wording that the bank's customers would be familiar with from previous authentic advisories it had issued such as: "Westpac will never ask for your personal or login details by email" -- even though it then proceeds to direct the reader to do just that.
The architects of the latest scam also adopted a more insidious Web re-direction technique to bamboozle victims. Activating the link in the email directs the victim to a fake version of the site but also opens an authentic copy of the site in a second browser window behind it.
The fake version of the site asks for the victim's account access details but returns an error message if he or she attempts to use it. The victim is then sent to the real site unaware that they've been duped.
Forsyth fears that the practice of phishing is at risk of being trivialised in the public's mind. He said that the malicious nature of the crime should be acknowledged.
"I think this is not just a scam like the Nigerian scam -- this is actually direct fraud and the perpetrators of the crime should be dealt with severely," said Forsyth.
Andreas Baumhof, chief technical officer of Microdasys, a German-based Internet security company specialising in Secure Socket Layer (SSL) technologies used to protect commercial Web transactions, is also concerned for the well being of online-banking customers.
He said that advice given to the public is often wrong, pointing to a recent high profile case of phishing in the US involving ISP Earthlink.
Shortly before the scam, the US Federal Trade Commission advised the public to look for a icon depicting a lock in the window of their Browsers when conducted sensitive transactions. The lock icon is associated with SSL Web security technology which involves encryption and security certificates. The FTC's issued blanket advice advice that such communications were definitively "safe".
Baumhof said the advice was wrong and may actually have contributed to the Earthlink incident. In that case the scam's designers used encrypted SSL conections to direct users to their site but fraudulent certificates to persuade victims they were in the right place. Baumhof reasons that the FTC's advice gave the victims a false sense of security.
"You can only see that the session is encrypted but you can't tell who you're talking to unless you've verified the certificate," said Baumhof.
Meanwhile Sophos said it had conveyed its concerns to the Australian High Tech Crime Centre.
http://news.zdnet.co.uk/internet/security/0,39020375,39147979,00.htm
Fraudulent Schemes
FIL-27-2004
March 12, 2004
TO: CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER (also of interest to Chief Information Officer)
SUBJECT: Guidance on Safeguarding Customers Against E-Mail and Internet-Related Fraudulent Schemes
Summary: The FDIC is alerting financial institutions to the increasing prevalence of e-mail and Internet-related fraudulent schemes targeting financial institution customers. The attached guidance provides financial institutions with background information on these schemes and describes how institutions can assist in protecting their customers.
In view of the recent increased outpouring of e-mail and Internet-related fraudulent schemes, the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation (FDIC) has prepared the attached guidance to assist financial institutions in helping their customers avoid becoming victims. These schemes are being perpetrated with mounting frequency, intensity and creativity. They typically involve the use of seemingly legitimate e-mail messages and Web sites to deceive consumers into disclosing sensitive information, such as bank account information, with the ultimate goal of gaining access to financial accounts or committing identity theft and other illegal acts. Many of the schemes reported recently have targeted financial institution customers.
Financial institution customers who provide confidential information to criminals engaging in e-mail and Internet-related fraudulent schemes face immediate risk. Criminals will normally act quickly to gain unauthorized access to financial accounts, commit identity theft or engage in other illegal acts before the victim realizes the fraud has occurred and takes actions to stop it. In addition, a financial institution that has been impersonated is subject to risk to its reputation, as customers and potential customers may attribute the activity to a perceived weakness in the institution's ability to conduct business securely and responsibly.
Financial institutions should promptly notify their FDIC Regional Office and the appropriate authorities if an e-mail or Internet-related fraudulent scheme is detected. Financial institutions should also report the incident to the appropriate law enforcement agencies and file a Suspicious Activity Report. Any information about possible fraudulent schemes may also be forwarded to the FDIC's Special Activities Section, 550 17th Street, N.W., Room F-4040, Washington, D.C. 20429, or transmitted electronically to alert@fdic.gov.
For more information about safeguarding customers from e-mail and Internet-related fraudulent schemes, please contact your FDIC Division of Supervision and Consumer Protection Regional Office or William H. Henley, Jr., Examination Specialist, at (202) 898-6513.
For your reference, FDIC Financial Institution Letters may be accessed from the FDIC's Web site at http://www.fdic.gov/news/news/financial/2004/index.html.
Michael J. Zamorski
Director
Division of Supervision and Consumer Protection
# # #
Attachment: Guidance on Safeguarding Customers Against E-Mail and Internet-Related Fraudulent Schemes
Distribution: FDIC-Supervised Banks (Commercial and Savings)
NOTE: Paper copies of FDIC financial institution letters may be obtained through the FDIC's Public Information Center , 801 17 th Street, NW , Room 100, Washington , DC 20434 (1-877-275-3342 or 202-416-6940).
Guidance on Safeguarding Customers Against E-Mail and Internet-Related Fraudulent Schemes
E-mail and Internet-related fraudulent schemes, such as “phishing” (pronounced “fishing”), are being perpetrated with increasing frequency, creativity and intensity. Phishing involves the use of seemingly legitimate e-mail messages and Internet Web sites to deceive consumers into disclosing sensitive information, such as bank account information, Social Security numbers, credit card numbers, passwords, and personal identification numbers (PINs). The perpetrator of the fraudulent e-mail message may use various means to convince the recipient that the message is legitimate and from a trusted source with which the recipient has an established business relationship, such as a bank. Techniques such as a false “from” address or the use of seemingly legitimate bank logos, Web links and graphics may be used to mislead e-mail recipients.
In most phishing schemes, the fraudulent e-mail message will request that recipients “update” or “validate” their financial or personal information in order to maintain their accounts, and direct them to a fraudulent Web site that may look very similar to the Web site of the legitimate business. These Web sites may include copied or “spoofed” pages from legitimate Web sites to further trick consumers into thinking they are responding to a bona fide request. Some consumers will mistakenly submit financial and personal information to the perpetrator who will use it to gain access to financial records or accounts, commit identity theft or engage in other illegal acts.
The Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation (FDIC) and other government agencies have also been “spoofed” in the perpetration of e-mail and Internet-related fraudulent schemes. For example, in January 2004, a fictitious e-mail message that appeared to be from the FDIC was widely distributed, and it told recipients that their deposit insurance would be suspended until they verified their identity. The e-mail message included a hyperlink to a fraudulent Web site that looked similar to the FDIC’s legitimate Web site and asked for confidential information, including bank account information.
Risks Associated With E-Mail and Internet-Related Fraudulent Schemes
Internet-related fraudulent schemes present a substantial risk to the reputation of any financial institution that is impersonated or spoofed. Financial institution customers and potential customers may mistakenly perceive that weak information security resulted in security breaches that allowed someone to obtain confidential information from the financial institution. Potential negative publicity regarding an institution’s business practices may cause a decline in the institution’s customer base, a loss in confidence or costly litigation.
In addition, customers who fall prey to e-mail and Internet-related fraudulent schemes face real and immediate risk. Criminals will normally act quickly to gain unauthorized access to financial accounts, commit identity theft, or engage in other illegal acts before the victim realizes the fraud has occurred and takes action to stop it.
Educating Financial Institution Customers About E-Mail and Internet-Related Fraudulent Schemes Financial institutions should consider the merits of educating customers about prevalent e-mail and Internet-related fraudulent schemes, such as phishing, and how to avoid them. This may be accomplished by providing customers with clear and bold statement stuffers and posting notices on Web sites that convey the following messages:
A financial institution’s Web page should never be accessed from a link provided by a third party. It should only be accessed by typing the Web site name, or URL address, into the Web browser or by using a “book mark” that directs the Web browser to the financial institution’s Web site.
A financial institution should not be sending e-mail messages that request confidential information, such as account numbers, passwords, or PINs. Financial institution customers should be reminded to report any such requests to the institution.
Financial institutions should maintain current Web site certificates and describe how the customer can authenticate the institution’s Web pages by checking the properties on a secure Web page.
To explain the red flags and risks of phishing and identity theft, financial institutions can refer customers to or use resources distributed by the Federal Trade Commission (FTC), including the following FTC brochures:
“How Not to Get Hooked by the ‘Phishing’ Scam,” published in July 2003, which is available at: http://www.ftc.gov/bcp/conline/pubs/alerts/phishingalrt.htm
“ID Theft: When Bad Things Happen to Your Good Name,” published in September 2002, which is available at: http://www.ftc.gov/bcp/conline/pubs/credit/idtheft.htm
Responding to E-Mail and Internet-Related Fraudulent Schemes
Financial institutions should consider enhancing incident response programs to address possible e-mail and Internet-related fraudulent schemes. Enhancements may include:
Incorporating notification procedures to alert customers of known e-mail and Internet-related fraudulent schemes and to caution them against responding;
Establishing a process to notify Internet service providers, domain name-issuing companies, and law enforcement to shut down fraudulent Web sites and other Internet resources that may be used to facilitate phishing or other e-mail and Internet-related fraudulent schemes;
Increasing suspicious activity monitoring and employing additional identity verification controls;
Offering customers assistance when fraud is detected in connection with customer accounts;
Notifying the proper authorities when e-mail and Internet-related fraudulent schemes are detected, including promptly notifying their FDIC Regional Office and the appropriate law enforcement agencies; and
Filing a Suspicious Activity Report when incidents of e-mail and Internet-related fraudulent schemes are suspected.
Steps Financial Institutions Can Take to Mitigate Risks Associated With E-Mail and Internet-Related Fraudulent Schemes
To help mitigate the risks associated with e-mail and Internet-related fraudulent schemes, financial institutions should implement appropriate information security controls as described in the Federal Financial Institutions Examination Council’s (FFIEC) “Information Security Booklet.”1 Specific actions that should be considered to prevent and deter e-mail and Internet-related fraudulent schemes include:
Improving authentication methods and procedures to protect against the risk of user ID and password theft from customers through e-mail and other frauds;2
Reviewing and, if necessary, enhancing practices for protecting confidential customer data;
Maintaining current Web site certificates and describing how customers can authenticate the financial institution’s Web pages by checking the properties on a secure Web page;
Monitoring accounts individually or in aggregate for unusual account activity such as address or phone number changes, a large or high volume of transfers, and unusual customer service requests;
Monitoring for fraudulent Web sites using variations of the financial institution’s name;
Establishing a toll-free number for customers to verify requests for confidential information or to report suspicious e-mail messages; and
Training customer service staff to refer customer concerns regarding suspicious e-mail request activity to security staff.
Conclusion
E-mail and Internet-related fraudulent schemes present a substantial risk to financial institutions and their customers. Financial institutions should consider developing programs to educate customers about e-mail and Internet-related fraudulent schemes and how to avoid them, consider enhancing incident response programs to address possible e-mail and Internet-related fraudulent schemes, and implement appropriate information security controls to help mitigate the risks associated with e-mail and Internet-related fraudulent schemes.
1 Refer to the FFIEC Information Technology Examination Handbook's "Information Security Booklet" located at www.ffiec.gov.
2 Refer to FDIC Financial Institution Letter 69-2001, "Authentication in an Electronic Banking Environment," issued on August 24, 2001.
Last Updated 3/15/2004 communications@fdic.gov
http://www.fdic.gov/news/news/financial/2004/fil2704a.html
Feds: E-mail subpoena ruling hurts law enforcement
By Kevin Poulsen, SecurityFocus Mar 5 2004 6:38PM
A federal appeals court has declined to reverse last year's decision that the issuance of an egregiously overbroad subpoena for e-mail can qualify as a computer intrusion in violation of anti-hacking laws, despite an argument by the Justice Department that a side-effect of the ruling has already made it harder for law enforcement officials to obtain Americans' private e-mail.
The defendant in the case, Alwyn Farey-Jones, was embroiled in commercial litigation with two officers of Integrated Capital Associates (ICA) when he instructed his then-attorney, Iryna Kwasny, to send a subpoena to the company's Internet service provider -- California-based NetGate. Under federal civil rules, a litigant can issue such a subpoena without prior approval from the court, but is required to "take reasonable steps to avoid imposing undue burden or expense" on the recipient.
"One might have thought, then, that the subpoena would request only e-mail related to the subject matter of the litigation, or maybe messages sent during some relevant time period, or at the very least those sent to or from employees in some way connected to the litigation," reads last August's decision by the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals. Instead, the subpoena demanded every single piece of e-mail ICA's officers and employees had ever sent or received.
By the time ICA learned of the subpoena, NetGate had already provided Farey-Jones with a sample of 339 e-mails from ICA -- most of them unrelated to the matter under litigation, and many of them privileged or personal. When ICA found out, they quickly got the subpoena quashed. An outraged district court magistrate termed the subpoena "massively overbroad" and "patently unlawful," and hit Farey-Jones with over $9,000 in sanctions.
Criminal Penalties
The ICA officers and employees whose e-mail was accessed went on to sue Farey-Jones and his attorney under the civil provisions of three federal privacy and computer protection laws, but a federal judge threw out the lawsuit. The 9th Circuit partially reversed that ruling last August, finding that the subpoena didn't violate federal wiretap law, but could constitute a violation of the Computer Fraud and Abuse Act and the Stored Communications Act (SCA), which outlaw unauthorized access to computers and stored e-mail respectively.
Although the ruling addressed a civil suit, both laws include criminal penalties. That means civil attorneys issuing overbroad subpoenas -- not an uncommon event -- now risk lawsuits, and even potential criminal prosecution as computer intruders, under the decision.
"In my view, the 9th Circuit decision... potentially criminalizes a broad swath of conduct," says San Francisco attorney Robert White, who represented Farey-Jones in the appeal. Electronic civil libertarians were split over the decision, seeing it as good for privacy, but a tempting tool for abuse by zealous prosecutors or litigious companies.
But when White filed a motion for rehearing at the 9th Circuit, he found himself with an unlikely ally in the case: the U.S. Justice Department, which filed an amicus brief supporting a new hearing.
Justice Department lawyers didn't object to an expansion of the Computer Fraud and Abuse Act -- their most common weapon against accused computer intruders and virus writers - but they were deeply troubled by the court's interpretation of the SCA, which they say hobbles their ability to obtain a suspect's e-mail.
Federal law protects e-mail under two different standards: messages in "electronic storage" at an ISP can only be obtained by law enforcement officials only with a search warrant issued by a judge based on probable cause to believe that a crime has been committed. But messages that the recipient has read and chosen not to delete can be obtained with a simple administrative subpoena.
"Difficulties for Law Enforcement Nationwide"
Based on the Justice Department's interpretation of that law, the FBI is long accustomed to being able to obtain messages that the recipient has read by simply handing the ISP an administrative subpoena, only troubling a judge when they need access to unopened e-mail, or, under another requirement of the law, messages older than 180 days.
But in ruling against Farey-Jones, the 9th Circuit found that the ICA messages were still in "electronic storage" at NetGate, even though the recipients had read them. It may seem a fine point, but the Justice Department worries that that interpretation places all e-mail less than 180 days old, and stored at an ISP, into the category that requires a search warrant.
"The significance of this change for law enforcement cannot be overstated," wrote Justice Department attorney Mark Eckenwiler in the amicus brief. "Substantial quantities of evidence previously available to state and federal prosecutors are no longer available under this heightened standard."
Prosecutors in the parts of the country governed by 9th Circuit case law -- eight western U.S. states and Hawaii -- have already stopped issuing administrative subpoenas for e-mail, according to the brief, filed last September, forcing them to go to a judge and show probable cause when they want a peek into a netizen's inbox.
"Moreover, because the Internet spans state and national borders, the panel's decision is likely to create difficulties for law enforcement nationwide," reads the filing, noting that some of the nation's largest e-mail providers, including Yahoo and Hotmail, are located in the 9th circuit.
"I was grateful -- it's nice to have the government on your side," says White. "It's a question of whether something is considered to be a stored communication or not, and that's really what this case is about, to a very large extent."
But despite Farey-Jones' unexpected help from Washington, last month, the appellate court rejected both Farey-Jones' bid for a new hearing, and the Justice Department's narrow argument over electronic storage. "We acknowledge that our interpretation of the Act differs from the government's and do not lightly conclude that the government's reading is erroneous," the court wrote. "Nonetheless... we think that prior access is irrelevant to whether the messages at issue were in electronic storage." On Thursday, the court agreed to temporarily suspend the civil suite against Farey-Jones while he appeals to the U.S. Supreme Court.
<tips@securityfocus.com>
http://www.securityfocus.com/printable/news/8199
As a result of some misleading and inaccurate coverage by the media, this letter clarifies the federal government's policy on the use of marihuana for medical purposes.
First let me say that the Government of Canada has not backed away from its medical marihuana program. If we were doing so, I can assure you that we would not be spending the time, energy and money that we are on moving ahead with the program, and with significant stakeholder involvement. This includes the establishment of the Stakeholder Advisory Committee on Marihuana for Medical Purposes, expected to meet for the first time in October 2002.
I know that many Canadians who are suffering from terminal or grave illnesses strongly and genuinely believe, with the support of their physicians, that smoking marihuana helps them live more comfortably and in less pain. In my role as Health Minister, I must balance those beliefs with the need to carry out research into the safety and effectiveness of marihuana as a medicine.
That is why our policy has two components. The first component is the Marihuana Medical Access Regulations (MMAR) which allow people with authorizations to possess and cultivate marihuana for medical purposes. At present over 800 people in Canada are permitted by Health Canada to possess marihuana for medical purposes. The MMAR remain in effect and people continue to apply.
The second component of our approach is research. These are two parallel tracks.
Unlike heroin and morphine products, marihuana is not approved as a medicine in any country in the world. Marihuana cannot be approved in Canada without scientific evidence proving its benefits and defining its risks. At present, while there are anecdotal reports of the value of smoked marihuana, the scientific studies about its safety and effectiveness are inconclusive.
Conducting research will allow us to better understand whether and for which medical conditions marihuana is an effective medicine and better understand the risks in relation to those benefits.
Health Canada continues to pursue the research plan initiated in 1999 by my predecessor Allan Rock. This will include broad-based clinical trials (that will accommodate large numbers of participants) and controlled clinical trials (involving smaller groups of patients). These clinical trials will use research grade marihuana, including that produced for Health Canada by Prairie Plant Systems.
It is our hope that these clinical trials will include many of the people permitted by Health Canada to possess marihuana for medical purposes.
Canadians who do not participate in this research can continue to apply for a license to cultivate marihuana or for a designate to cultivate it for them, under the existing regulations.
Let me reassure all Canadians that the federal government remains committed to our medical marihuana program. This program takes a compassionate approach to Canadians who suffer from serious medical conditions while, at the same time, pursuing a sound research agenda.
I hope this letter will clear up any confusion caused by your coverage.
A. Anne McLellan
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Last Modified 2003-05-15
http://www.hc-sc.gc.ca/hecs-sesc/ocma/letter.htm
Medical Marihuana in a Time of Prohibition
International Journal of Drug Policy, April, 1999
Lester Grinspoon, M.D.
"A new scientific truth does not triumph by convincing its opponents and making them see the light, but rather because its opponents eventually die and a new generation grows up that is familiar with it."—Max Planck
The medical value of marihuana has become increasingly clear to many physicians and patients. There are three reasons for this. First, it is remarkably non-toxic. Unlike most of the medicines in the present pharmacopeia, it has never caused an overdose death. Its short-term and long-term side effects are minimal compared to medicines for which it will be substituted. Second, once patients no longer have to pay the prohibition tariff, it will be much less expensive than the medicines it replaces. Third, it is remarkably versatile. Case histories and clinical experience suggest that it is useful in the treatment of more than two dozen symptoms and syndromes, and others will undoubtedly be discovered in the future.
As clinical evidence of marihuana's medical efficacy and safety accumulates and first-hand experience of its value becomes more common, the discussion is turning to how it should be made available. When I first considered this issue in the early 1970s, I thought the main problem was its classification in Schedule I of the Comprehensive Drug Abuse and Control Act of 1970, which describes it as having a high potential for abuse, no accepted medical use in the United States, and lack of accepted safety for use under medical supervision. At that time I naively believed that a change to Schedule II would overcome a major obstacle, because clinical research would be possible and prescriptions would eventually be allowed.
I was the first witness at a joint meeting of the Drug Enforcement Administration and the Food and Drug Administration that was convened to consider a petition for rescheduling introduced by the National Organization for the Reform of Marijuana Laws in 1972. At that time I had already come to believe that the greatest harm in recreational use of marihuana came not from the drug itself but from the effects of prohibition. But I saw that as a separate issue; I thought that, like opiates and cocaine, cannabis could be used medically while remaining outlawed for other purposes. I also thought that once it was transferred to Schedule II, research on marihuana would be pursued eagerly, since it had shown such interesting therapeutic properties. From this research we would eventually be able to determine how it should be used medicinally, how prescriptions could be provided, and who would be responsible for quality control. Twenty-five years later, I have begun to doubt this. It would be highly desirable if marihuana could be approved as a legitimate medicine within the present federal regulatory system, but it now seems to me unlikely.
First, I should note that cannabis has already been a legally accepted medicine in the United States several times. Until 1941, when it was dropped after the passage of the Marihuana Tax Act, it was one of the drugs listed in the U.S. Pharmacopeia. If it had not been removed at that time, it would have been grandfathered into the Comprehensive Drug Abuse and Control Act as a prescription drug, just as cocaine and morphine were. Again, in the late 1970s and early 1980s, cannabis was used medically by hundreds of patients (mainly in the form of synthetic tetrahydrocannabinol) in projects conducted by several of the states for the treatment of nausea and vomiting in cancer chemotherapy. This episode ended because each state program had to comply with an enormous federal paperwork burden that was more than the physicians and administrators involved could bear. The federal government itself approved the use of cannabis as a medicine in 1976 by instituting the Compassionate IND program, under which physicians could obtain an individual Investigational New Drug application (IND) for a patient to receive cannabis. This program too was so bureaucratically burdened that in the course of its history only about three dozen patients ever received marihuana, and only eight are still receiving it. When the program was discontinued permanently in 1992, James O. Mason, the chief of the Public Health Service, gave the following reason: "If it is perceived that the Public Health Service is going around giving marihuana to folks, there would be a perception that this stuff can't be so bad. It gives a bad signal. I don't mind doing that if there is no other way of helping these people...But there is not a shred of evidence that smoking marihuana assists a person with AIDS." In effect, this action was analogous to the recall of a prescription drug, without any evidence of toxic effects to support it.
Today, even transferring marihuana to Schedule II would not be enough to make it available as a prescription drug. Such drugs must undergo rigorous, expensive, and time-consuming tests before they are approved by the Food and Drug Administration for marketing as medicines. The purpose is to protect the consumer by establishing safety and efficacy. Because no drug is completely safe or always efficacious, an approved drug has presumably satisfied a risk-benefit analysis. When physicians prescribe for individual patients they conduct an informal analysis of a similar kind, taking into account not just the drug's overall safety and efficacy, but its risk and benefits for a given patient with a given condition. The formal drug approval procedures help to provide physicians with the information they need to make this analysis.
http://www.amigula.com/doctors.html
Public Pot Company's Pipe Dreams
By Charles Mandel
Online gambling pioneer Warren Eugene is rolling the dice again. This time the founder of Internet Casinos plans to establish the world's first publicly traded marijuana company. Eugene said he plans to list Medical Cannabis Inc. on the Toronto TSX Venture Exchange and on Nasdaq.
"The stock can go sky-high,'' said Eugene. "The company views the current prohibition of marijuana as similar to that of alcohol and tobacco. If (liquor baron) Sam Bronfman were alive today, he might very well be lobbying the government for bonded cannabis warehouses."
However, the flamboyant Internet entrepreneur faces a number of hurdles before he can cash in his chips, including a potential challenge from Health Canada, the Canadian agency that currently regulates the use of medicinal pot.
Eugene's business plan centers on Bill C-38 -- a bill that would allow Canadians to possess up to 15 grams of non-medical marijuana. He said he believes if Bill C-38 becomes law, it would eliminate the need for Health Canada to regulate medicinal pot because people would be able to grow their own grass. The new law would also create a business opportunity for Eugene.
"They will need an independent who can grow it, package it, sell it and be able to pay taxes to the government to the tune of a billion dollars a year," he said.
In preparation for marijuana decriminalization in Canada, Eugene said Medical Cannabis is aggressively acquiring licensed Canadian growers of medical grass. While Eugene is not licensed to grow medical marijuana himself, he said he has already hired four licensed growers and is negotiating for more. Medical Cannabis gave the growers stock, according to Eugene, who added that Health Canada is not aware of his actions.
Currently, in order to grow marijuana legally, Canadians must have symptoms associated with a terminal illness with a prognosis of death within 12 months, or symptoms associated with other specified medical conditions. If the individuals are too ill to grow their own grass, they may have a licensed party grow it for them. Health Canada has licensed 520 individuals to grow marijuana as of October.
Eugene estimates the grass crop is worth anywhere from CN$4 billion to CN$7 billion and thinks a money-making opportunity exists as governments move to decriminalize the drug. He also said a U.S. Supreme Court decision in October lifting a federal ban on medical marijuana will open the doors to a larger international market.
Jirina Vlk, a spokeswoman with Health Canada, expressed doubt about Eugene's plans and said the only company currently authorized to grow pot for the government is Prairie Plant Systems, a Saskatoon, Saskatchewan-based biotech firm that is raising weed in an abandoned Manitoba mine shaft. Prairie Plant Systems has a five-year, CN$5.7 million contract to raise grass for medical use.
"You can't buy licenses. It's a person, not a company, that has to have a license,'' Vlk said, adding that Medical Cannabis is operating outside Health Canada's regulations in acquiring licensed growers.
Catherine Saunders, another Health Canada spokeswoman, said the practice of passing on growing licenses is illegal and would be a matter for law enforcement agencies. She said the government agency would investigate any patients who transferred their licenses to unauthorized growers.
Brent Zettl, president and CEO of Prairie Plant Systems, confirmed his firm is Canada's only legal, large-scale producer. The company delivers to about 80 doctors, who in turn pass along the prescription marijuana to their patients.
Nor is getting medical grass easy. Would-be marijuana users apply to Health Canada's Office of Cannabis Medical Access. They must give information about themselves, their medical condition and whether they plan to grow the grass themselves or have someone do it for them. They must have declarations from one or more doctors stating that all conventional treatments for their condition have been tried.
Once approved, plants may be grown indoors or out. The amount that is grown and stored depends on a daily dosage approved by the individual's physician. A license is good for up to one year.
To gain his entrance onto the public markets, Eugene is engineering a reverse takeover, selling 51 percent ownership of Medical Cannabis to a company already listed on the two exchanges, with a further option for the firm to purchase the remaining 49 percent. "What is unique about this business proposal,'' he said, "is that as a public company everyone now has a sincere and legal way to potentially make money in a budding marijuana industry."
Eugene said he believes a publicly listed marijuana company would have credibility because it could be monitored. "We have to file our annual reports. We're under fiduciary responsibility."
Zettl expressed doubt that Eugene can make a go of it in the marijuana business. "After going through what we've gone through,'' Zettl said, "the testing and re-testing -- a certain ethical and pharmaceutical standard has to be maintained. It will really be Health Canada's decision. In the future, time will tell what happens."
Over at the TSX exchange, the weed firm's announcement also raised eyebrows. "This is the first I've heard of it,'' said TSX spokesman Steve Kee. He said the exchange would have to see if Medical Cannabis meets the listing requirements, a set of regulations governing everything from finances to the operation of the business, and which could take anywhere from weeks to months to satisfy.
"It's a huge gamble for me,'' Eugene said. But if anyone's up to the challenge, it's Eugene. In the mid-1990s, the entrepreneur -- amid much skepticism -- established the first online cash casino, and in 1995 he told Time magazine he believed he was "the founder of New York's famous Stork Club" in a past life.
The Internet casino king has put up CN$500,000 of his own money, and said he intends to raise more through a private placement. The funds would go toward "development and cultivation of the product" as well as branding. "The key to this is branding,'' Eugene said.
Justice Canada spokeswoman Pascale Boulay pointed out that with the end of the current session of Canadian parliament, Bill C-38 has been tabled. "Now it will be up to the new government to decide if they want to resurrect Bill C-38 at the stage that it was, or even to have a complete new bill,'' she said. It would be up to the Canadian parliament to pass a new motion to bring the bill back.
Despite all the obstacles, Eugene remains optimistic that the bill will pass, allowing him to move Medical Cannabis forward. He anticipates that when Parliament resumes in the new year with a new prime minister (Paul Martin is taking over from Jean Chretien, who has retired) that Bill C-38 will return as unfinished business and that a more sympathetic Health Minister may be in place.
"It's certainly an idea whose time has come,'' he said. "Instead of (my) going into organized crime, this is a push to give them (the government) CN$900 million to CN$1.5 billion in potential tax revenue."
The world`s first publicly traded marijuana company gets noticed! Amigula Incorporated gave the first presentation ever for a publicly traded medical marijuana company. The stock traded during yesterday`s session in a range of $3.05-$3.65 as volume hit 18,300 shares as the company slowly gets into the public eye. This is a big story stock; keep an eye on this InvestSource Focus stock as they get introduced to the street.
http://www.pinksheets.com/quote/news.jsp?url=fis_story.asp%3Ftextpath%3DCOMTEX%5Cmt%5C2004%5C03%5C10...
World's First Publicly Traded Medical Marijuana Company
Announces Today that the Company Has Formulated a Plan to Have Well-Known Hollywood Celebrities -- Entertainers -- Endorse the Company and the Company's Products
BEVERLY HILLS, Calif., Mar 15, 2004 (BUSINESS WIRE) -- Amigula Incorporated (OTC:AMJL), the world's first publicly traded medical marijuana company, today announced that several Hollywood agents and management groups have been working with their clients at the bequest of Amigula Inc., negotiating contracts with "Super Stars" willing to endorse medical marijuana as a viable medicinal therapy for a variety of extreme illnesses, including multiple sclerosis, epilepsy, arthritis, glaucoma, AIDS, nausea - chemotherapy, anxiety and stress, as well as for several other dysfunctions.
"We approached several well-known talent agents and managers to request that they approach their talent and present our cause and opportunity to them. Some of the stars wished us well and declined at first, then called their agents back after thinking things over and said 'Let's talk,'" said Warren Eugene, president, Amigula Inc.
"We require a star who is well known and trusted by a geriatric and maturing population. We require someone to educate people with us. There is so much by way of misconception and myth surrounding marijuana; it needs a star to assist us in getting the message right. That message is a simple one -- that marijuana is an excellent alternative homeopic therapy for those truly suffering and requiring medications. We are an agricultural pharmaceutical company on a mission to do good for others.
"So that's when it hit me, what about stars who have excelled at fighting for others with illness. These stars are heroes to millions of people the world over.
"One star actually did a TV episode where she smoked marijuana. She is of the right age and high quality to endorse our company and products. We are pursuing her. There are several stars who would be naturals for us.
"Some have had to personally battle major illness; they had to go through treatment for illness and could empathize with millions of other people requiring therapeutic relief.
"There will be many stars, before too long, who will come to our side and join us in this important quest, of that I'm certain. It's still early; we just got started a few months ago. I'm confident that things will work out well for us. This is history in the making," said Eugene.
About Amigula Inc.
Amigula Inc. (www.Amigula.com) has recently completed the purchase of 51% of Medical Cannabis Inc. and has announced their plans to file as a reporting issuer. The company plans to list on a major exchange beginning with an application for a listing on the American Stock Exchange (AMEX) or Nasdaq, as well as several European exchanges. The company views the current prohibition of marijuana as similar to that of alcohol, beer and tobacco. Canada's marijuana crop alone is estimated at $4 billion to $7 billion. If a single company controlled it, it would be larger than Canada's oil and gas business and agricultural industries. On October 7, 2003, the Ontario Superior Court ruled that business and individuals be allowed to grow and supply medical marijuana, effectively relieving the Canadian government of its often criticized and fairly unsuccessful attempts. Health Canada "permitted persons" (exemptees) can now pay Amigula to grow marijuana for them. The ruling makes it easier for sick people to get marijuana by allowing them easier access -- more choice and fair prices. The company has a mandate to develop and improve the medical marijuana business worldwide and is on the acquisition and consolidation trail of other legal licensed marijuana operations with notable international brands.
Statements in this press release that are not historical facts are forward-looking statements within the meaning of the Securities Act of 1933, as amended. Those statements include statements regarding the intent, belief or current expectations of the Company and its management. Such statements reflect management's current views, are based on certain assumptions and involve risks and uncertainties. Actual results, events, or performance may differ materially from the above forward- looking statements due to a number of important factors, and will be dependent upon a variety of factors, including, but not limited to, our ability to obtain additional financing and access funds from our existing financing arrangements that will allow us to continue our current and future operations. The Company undertakes no obligation to publicly update these forward-looking statements to reflect events or circumstances that occur after the date hereof or to reflect any change in the Company's expectations with regard to these forward-looking statements or the occurrence of unanticipated events.
SOURCE: Amigula Inc.
CONTACT: Amigula Inc.
Warren Eugene, 416-838-3600
www.amigula.com
Customize your Business Wire news & multimedia to match your needs.
Get breaking news from companies and organizations worldwide.
Logon for FREE today at www.BusinessWire.com.
Copyright (C) 2004 Business Wire. All rights reserved.
-0-
KEYWORD: CALIFORNIA INTERNATIONAL CANADA
INDUSTRY KEYWORD: ENVIRONMENT
PHARMACEUTICAL
ALTERNATIVE
MEDICINE
GOVERNMENT
ENTERTAINMENT
PRODUCT
The Worlds First Publicly Traded Marijuana Company Announces Today That the Company Intends on Producing a Series of Infomercials
BEVERLY HILLS, Calif., Mar 17, 2004 (BUSINESS WIRE) -- Infomercials will appear on television and cable stations in several target markets including - coverage in Canada - New York, New Jersey, California and Florida.
Amigula Incorporated (Other OTC: AMJL) the Worlds First Publicly traded Medical Marijuana Company, today announced that they are negotiating contracts with infomercial producers - cable operators to air innovative - original - "Cooking and baking with the entire family to help Grandma and Grandpa and Aunty Garoo" - who are suffering with Arthritis and Cancer and seek relief and remedy.
We are touting a cookbook with recipes that enable budding epicureans to explore recipes that include healthy doses of legitimate legal marijuana. Marijuana brownies, cupcakes, gingerbread men, pasta dishes, soups, chicken, beef, pate's, will all be featured in our cookbooks.
The company is seeking STARS, talents - willing to appear in the infomercials to endorse medical marijuana as a viable medicinal therapy for a variety of extreme illness, including Multiple Sclerosis, Epilepsy, Arthritis, Glaucoma, AIDS, Nausea - Chemotherapy, Anxiety, Stress, as well as for several other dysfunctions.
"We approached several well-known talent agents and managers to request that they approach their talent and present our infomercial idea. They loved it," says Warren B. Eugene president of Amigula Inc.
We require STARS who are well known and trusted by a geriatric and maturing population. We require someone to educate people with us. There is so much by way of misconception and myth surrounding marijuana; it needs a STAR to assist us in getting the message right.
That message is a simple one - that marijuana is an excellent alternative medical therapy for those truly suffering and requiring medications. We are an agricultural pharmaceutical company on a mission to do good for others.
Millions of Americans and Canadians will see the planned regular scheduled infomercials that are located on lower channels, at prime time surfing hours.
The infomercials feature a family in the kitchen cooking and baking with marijuana, all of them personally getting involved to help their loved ones battle major illness; they, Grandma and Grandpa and aunty Garoo - are being treated for illness and the entire family is transformed and can really do something to help their loved ones. They, (the family consisting of, Mom, Dad, the kids), can empathize with Grandma and Grandpa and their beloved Aunty, and they are doing something real for them. They're taking part in trying to help them. Often family members are at a loss, they feel that they can't partake or do something for their sick loved one. This gets them all personally involved and what a better place to do it than at home in the kitchen.
"It's still early we just got started a few months ago. I'm confident that things will work out well for us. We at the company are on a mission to help others," says Mr. Eugene.
About Amigula Inc.
Amigula Inc. (www.Amigula.com) has recently completed the purchase of 51% of Medical Cannabis Inc. and has announced their plans to file as a reporting issuer. The company plans to list on a major exchange beginning with an application for a listing on the American Stock Exchange (AMEX) or Nasdaq as well as several European exchanges. The company views the current prohibition of marijuana as similar to that of alcohol, beer and tobacco. Canada's marijuana crop alone is estimated at $4 billion to $7 billion. If a single company controlled it, it would be larger than Canada's oil and gas business and agricultural industries. On October 7, 2003 the Ontario Superior Court ruled that business and individuals be allowed to grow and supply medical marijuana, effectively relieving the Canadian government of its often criticized and fairly unsuccessful attempts. Health Canada "permitted persons" (exemptees) can now pay Amigula to grow marijuana for them. The ruling makes it easier for sick people to get marijuana by allowing them easier access -- more choice and fair prices. The company has a mandate to develop and improve the medical marijuana business worldwide and is on the acquisition and consolidation trail of other legal licensed marijuana operations with notable international brands.
Statements in this press release that are not historical facts are forward-looking statements within the meaning of the Securities Act of 1933, as amended. Those statements include statements regarding the intent, belief or current expectations of the Company and its management. Such statements reflect management's current views, are based on certain assumptions and involve risks and uncertainties. Actual results, events, or performance may differ materially from the above forward- looking statements due to a number of important factors, and will be dependent upon a variety of factors, including, but not limited to, our ability to obtain additional financing and access funds from our existing financing arrangements that will allow us to continue our current and future operations. The Company undertakes no obligation to publicly update these forward-looking statements to reflect events or circumstances that occur after the date hereof or to reflect any change in the Company's expectations with regard to these forward-looking statements or the occurrence of unanticipated events.
SOURCE: Amigula Inc.
CONTACT: Amigula Inc.
Warren Eugene, 416-838-3600
www.amigula.com
Customize your Business Wire news & multimedia to match your needs.
Get breaking news from companies and organizations worldwide.
Logon for FREE today at www.BusinessWire.com.
Copyright (C) 2004 Business Wire. All rights reserved.
-0-
KEYWORD: NEW YORK NEW JERSEY FLORIDA CALIFORNIA INTERNATIONAL
INDUSTRY KEYWORD: RETAIL
FOODS/BEVERAGES
ADVERTISING/MARKETING
ENVIRONMENT
ALTERNATIVE
MEDICINE
Amigula Incorporated Will Soon Be Providing Canadian Pharmacies with Government Certified Marijuana
NEW YORK, Mar 22, 2004 (BUSINESS WIRE) -- The company has prepared for this news for the last 3 months and clearly has the first mover advantage. This is what Warren Eugene is terrific at. He recognizes and acts on opportunities. States, Peter Hilton Mijovick Secretary of Amigula Inc. (Other OTC: AMJL).
The Canadian government has approved a pilot project in British Columbia today allowing local pharmacies in British Columbia the opportunity to sell marijuana to those with prescriptions.
Officials are organizing a pilot project in British Columbia, modeled on a year old program in the Netherlands.
Canada would be the second country in the world after the Netherlands to allow the direct sale of medical marijuana in pharmacies.
A notice of the government-endorsed change will be distributed to drug store pharmacists this spring 2004.
Medical marijuana is prescribed as a viable medicinal therapy for a variety of extreme illness, including Multiple Sclerosis, Epilepsy, Arthritis, Glaucoma, Aids, Nausea - Chemotherapy, Anxiety, Stress, as well as for several other dysfunctions. The company is investigating - nano drug -medicinal marijuana - therapy - technology.
The company is in negotiations with well-known and trusted Hollywood Super Stars, who endorse and support medical marijuana. We require someone to educate "the people" with us. There is so much by way of misconception and myth surrounding marijuana; it needs a STAR to assist us in getting the message right. That message is a simple one - that marijuana is an excellent alternative therapy for those truly suffering and requiring medications. We are an agricultural pharmaceutical company on a mission to do good for others" Says Warren B. Eugene - President of Amigula Inc.
Amigula Inc. (www.Amigula.com) has recently completed the purchase of 51% of Medical Cannabis Inc. and has announced their plans to file as a reporting issuer. The company plans to list on a major exchange beginning with an application for a listing on the American Stock Exchange (AMEX) or Nasdaq as well as several European exchanges. The company views the current prohibition of marijuana as similar to that of alcohol, beer and tobacco. Canada's marijuana crop alone is estimated at $4 billion to $7 billion. If a single company controlled it, it would be larger than Canada's oil and gas business and agricultural industries. On October 7, 2003 the Ontario Superior Court ruled that business and individuals be allowed to grow and supply medical marijuana, effectively relieving the Canadian government of its often criticized and fairly unsuccessful attempts. Health Canada "permitted persons" (exemptees) can now pay Amigula to grow marijuana for them. The ruling makes it easier for sick people to get marijuana by allowing them easier access -- more choice and fair prices. The company has a mandate to develop and improve the medical marijuana business worldwide and is on the acquisition and consolidation trail of other legal licensed marijuana operations with notable international brands.
Statements in this press release that are not historical facts are forward-looking statements within the meaning of the Securities Act of 1933, as amended. Those statements include statements regarding the intent, belief or current expectations of the Company and its management. Such statements reflect management's current views, are based on certain assumptions and involve risks and uncertainties. Actual results, events, or performance may differ materially from the above forward- looking statements due to a number of important factors, and will be dependent upon a variety of factors, including, but not limited to, our ability to obtain additional financing and access funds from our existing financing arrangements that will allow us to continue our current and future operations. The Company undertakes no obligation to publicly update these forward-looking statements to reflect events or circumstances that occur after the date hereof or to reflect any change in the Company's expectations with regard to these forward-looking statements or the occurrence of unanticipated events.
SOURCE: Amigula Incorporated
CONTACT: Amigula, Inc.
Warren Eugene, 416/838-3600
www.amigula.com
Customize your Business Wire news & multimedia to match your needs.
Get breaking news from companies and organizations worldwide.
Logon for FREE today at www.BusinessWire.com.
Copyright (C) 2004 Business Wire. All rights reserved.
-0-
KEYWORD: CALIFORNIA INTERNATIONAL CANADA
INDUSTRY KEYWORD: PHARMACEUTICAL
Amigula Incorporated -- The Worlds First Publicly Traded Marijuana Company celebrating Victory
Published in M2 PressWIRE on Monday, 22 March 2004 at 18:45 GMT
Copyright (C) 2004, M2 Communications Ltd.
Is celebrating another victory, as the company will soon be providing Canadian pharmacies with government certified marijuana.
The Canadian government has approved a pilot project in British Columbia today allowing local pharmacies in British Columbia the opportunity to sell marijuana to those with prescriptions.
Officials are organizing a pilot project in British Columbia, modeled on a year old program in the Netherlands.
Canada would be the second country in the world after the Netherlands to allow the direct sale of medical marijuana in pharmacies.
A notice of the government endorsed change will be distributed to drug store pharmacists this spring 2004.
Medical marijuana is prescribed as a viable medicinal therapy for a variety of extreme illness, including Multiple Sclerosis, Epilepsy, Arthritis, Glaucoma, Aids, Nausea - Chemotherapy, Anxiety, Stress, as well as for several other dysfunctions.
The company is in negotiations with well known and trusted Hollywood Super Stars, who endorse and support medical marijuana. We require someone to educate "the people" with us. There is so much by way of misconception and myth surrounding marijuana; it needs a STAR to assist us in getting the message right. That message is a simple one - that marijuana is an excellent alternative therapy for those truly suffering and requiring medications. We are an agricultural pharmaceutical company on a mission to do good for others" Says Warren B. Eugene - President of Amigula Inc.
Amigula Inc. (www.Amigula.com) has recently completed the purchase of 51% of Medical Cannabis Inc. and has announced their plans to file as a reporting issuer. The company plans to list on a major exchange beginning with an application for a listing on the American Stock Exchange (AMEX) or Nasdaq as well as several European exchanges. The company views the current prohibition of marijuana as similar to that of alcohol, beer and tobacco. Canada's marijuana crop alone is estimated at $4 billion to $7 billion. If a single company controlled it, it would be larger than Canada's oil and gas business and agricultural industries. On October 7, 2003 the Ontario Superior Court ruled that business and individuals be allowed to grow and supply medical marijuana, effectively relieving the Canadian government of its often criticized and fairly unsuccessful attempts. Health Canada "permitted persons" (exemptees) can now pay Amigula to grow marijuana for them. The ruling makes it easier for sick people to get marijuana by allowing them easier access -- more choice and fair prices. The company has a mandate to develop and improve the medical marijuana business worldwide and is on the acquisition and consolidation trail of other legal licensed marijuana operations with notable international brands.
Statements in this press release that are not historical facts are forward-looking statements within the meaning of the Securities Act of 1933, as amended. Those statements include statements regarding the intent, belief or current expectations of the Company and its management. Such statements reflect management's current views, are based on certain assumptions and involve risks and uncertainties. Actual results, events, or performance may differ materially from the above forward- looking statements due to a number of important factors, and will be dependent upon a variety of factors, including, but not limited to, our ability to obtain additional financing and access funds from our existing financing arrangements that will allow us to continue our current and future operations. The Company undertakes no obligation to publicly update these forward-looking statements to reflect events or circumstances that occur after the date hereof or to reflect any change in the Company's expectations with regard to these forward-looking statements or the occurrence of unanticipated events.
SOURCE: Amigula Incorporated By Staff
For further information, please contact:
Amigula Inc.
Tel: +1 416 838 3600
e-mail: investors@amigula.com
WWW: http://www.amigula.com
Release Date: 03/22/2004
CEO Council to Lobby for Small Business Issuer Amendments to Sarbanes-Oxley
The CEO Council announced on March 17, 2004 that it has been invited by The National Small Public Company Leadership Council to participate in a private meeting with Members of the U.S. Congress and staff regarding Sarbanes-Oxley, as well as other issues impacting small emerging growth companies. The meeting will take place on April 1st and attendance is by private invitation only. CEO Council directors will also attend a series of meetings on Capitol Hill to discuss the Sarbanes-Oxley law and its impact on small public companies.All Small Business Issuers and their investors and capital markets practitioners are urged to submit their comments and recommendations for amendments or exemptions to the Sarbanes-Oxley law to The CEO Council, either by email to scrane@ceocouncil.net or in our discussion group.
http://www.ceocouncil.net/
That rumor is news to me...but if its news about getting funded for their technology that would be good news as long as its not death spiral funding...
Letters to the Editor
Financial Times
letters.editor@ft.com
Sir,
Jason Huemer's “Hedge Row” column (The heat is on for funds' Pipe strategy, March 15), while having elements of accuracy in describing the past practices of a few institutions in the PIPE market, misrepresents the purpose and nature of PIPE financings. Moreover, the article inappropriately links BayStar to the abusive financing practices referenced by Mr. Huemer. Our funds have never taken part in toxic or death spiral convertible financings of any sort.
PIPEs, or Private Investments in Public Equities, are a legitimate and important financing tool for small and mid-cap publicly traded companies to raise capital more efficiently than with a traditional secondary stock offering. Furthermore, relative to the traditional secondary offering, these types of financings are often completed with less downward pressure on the stock price, less resulting dilution for common shareholders and meaningfully less use of management time and resources.
Mr. Huemer accurately describes a number of transactions completed a few years ago in which companies issued a form of convertible bonds with a resetting conversion price granting more stock to the investor as the stock price declined. The problems were caused not by the PIPE itself, but rather by the unusual reset provision, which led to massive short-selling when the stock price began to fall. These types of transactions are quite uncommon today, with simple issuances of common stock being today's overwhelming favorite transaction structure.
The BayStar Capital II Funds have never structured a PIPE with the onerous reset features described by Mr. Huemer – our firm specifically rejects that structure. In all its investments, BayStar works to be a partner with the Issuer and uses the BayStar funds to allow the Issuer to achieve its operational goals.
Linking BayStar to the practices described by Mr. Huemer is not supported by the facts and regrettably undermines the many strong partnerships BayStar has fostered with Issuers.
Sincerely,
Larry Goldfarb
Managing Partner
BayStar Capital
http://baystarcapital.com/public/news.html#
BayStar Invests in UNIX Software Co in $50M PIPE
October 20, 2003
Larkspur, Calif.-based private equity firm BayStar Capital has led a $50 million round of financing in UNIX operating system owner SCO Group.
The investment was structured as a private placement of non-voting Series A convertible preferred shares which are convertible into common shares at a fixed conversion price of $16.93 per share. BayStar and its other investors will own approximately 17.5% of the company when it converts its shares.
SCO Group, based in Lindon, Utah, is the owner of the UNIX operating system. The company has a network of more than 11,000 resellers and 4,000 developers. SCO products include UNIX platforms; messaging, authentication, and e-business tools; and services that include technical support, education, consulting, and solution provider support programs.
“SCO owns the most predominant UNIX software assets in the I.T. industry, has a 20 year history of providing trusted software solutions to end users around the globe, and an aggressive and seasoned management team focused on generating profitable growth,” Lawrence Goldfarb, general partner of BayStar Capital, said in the statement.
Last December, BayStar Capital co-led a $200 million equity component in a $450 million round of investment in publicly traded XM Satellite Radio Holdings.
In October 2002, BayStar hired Gianfilippo Cuneo as a general partner to lead the firm’s Italian activities. Cuneo began his carrer for McKinsey & Co. in New York in 1964 and proceeded to open the firm’s Italian office in 1971. He became managing director of the Italian office and a director of McKinsey & Co. After leaving the firm, he started his own consulting firm. He also founded a private equity fund in partnership with Banca Commerciale Italiana in 1974.
BayStar Capital is a firm that invests in private equity and growth-oriented public companies in the technology and life sciences sectors. The firm’s typical investment ranges between $5 million and $50 million. The firm has invested $400 million since its inception in 1998. The firm also specializes in private investment in public entities, or PIPE, transactions.
BayStar Capital Partners
Lawrence Goldfarb,
Managing Member of the General Partner Mr. Lawrence Goldfarb is a Managing Member of the General Partner. Lawrence Goldfarb brings fifteen years of investment banking and corporate finance experience to the Partnership. Mr. Goldfarb began his career in 1984 as a tax attorney with the New York offices of Milbank, Tweed, Hadley & McCloy and thereafter Skadden, Arps, Slate, Meagher & Flom, where he provided tax analysis and consulting services in connection with a wide variety of complex transactions, including financings, mergers and recapitalizations. In 1987, Mr. Goldfarb joined the San Francisco office of Credit Suisse First Boston Corporation as Director of mergers and acquisitions. In 1992, Mr. Goldfarb joined GFC Capital Corp. (an affiliate of Loeb Partners) as President. From 1994 to 1997, Mr. Goldfarb served as Chief Financial Officer, Chief Operating Officer and Executive Vice President for Exergy, Inc., an independent energy development venture supported by George Soros' Quantum Industrial Fund, the General Electric Corporation, Asea Brown Boveri Corporation, Ansaldo Energia and Ebara Corporation. Thereafter, Mr. Goldfarb joined Shoreline Pacific Investment Finance, a private placement agency firm, as Executive Vice President, before joining with Mr. Lamar to form BayStar Capital in January 1999. Mr. Goldfarb received his Bachelor of Arts degree from George Washington University in 1981 and his law degree, cum laude, from Georgetown Law School in 1984.
Steven M. Lamar,
Managing Member of the General Partner Mr. Steven M. Lamar is a Managing Member of the General Partner. Mr. Lamar brings nine years experience in financial services from two of the country's leading banks. From 1989 to 1993, Mr. Lamar served as Bank Officer and Mortgage Consultant at Wells Fargo Bank in San Diego, California. From 1993 to 1996, Mr. Lamar served as Bank Manager at Citibank, FSB. In 1996, Mr. Lamar joined Shoreline Pacific Institutional Finance, a private placement agency firm as Vice President of Institutional Sales, where he represented companies, lenders, and investors in 22 private equity transactions totaling approximately $300 million. In November 1998, Mr. Lamar teamed up with Mr. Goldfarb and formed BayStar Capital in January 1999. Mr. Lamar received his Bachelor of Science degree in Business Administration with an emphasis in finance from San Diego State University in 1992.
Steven P. Derby,
Managing Member of the General Partner Mr. Steven P. Derby is a Managing Member of the General Partner. Mr. Derby brings ten years experience in investment analysis, derivative structuring, and risk management to the Partnership. From 1993 to 1995, Mr. Derby was an analyst at JRO Associates, a private investment firm, where he specialized in the fundamental analysis of technology and cyclical industries. From 1995 to 1998, Mr. Derby was a principal at Libra Advisors, a private investment firm. From 1998 to 2000, he was a portfolio manager at Oracle Investment Management, an investment firm specializing in private and public investments in healthcare, bioscience and related industries. In 2000, Mr. Derby became the portfolio manager of SDS Merchant Fund, LP, a private investment fund that concentrates in the healthcare, technology, oil and gas and retail sectors. He also acts as the managing member of the general partner and management company of the SDS Merchant Fund, LP. Mr. Derby joined BayStar Capital in February 2003. Mr. Derby received his Bachelor of Science degree in Chemical Engineering from the University of New Hampshire and his M.B.A. from Stanford University, where he was the recipient of the Alexander A. Robichek Award and an Arjay Miller Scholar.
Advisors The Managing Members will be aided in their activities by the Committee of Advisors. The Committee of Advisors is comprised of the non-Managing Members of the General Partner. The Committee of Advisors will provide advice to the Managing Members as to market conditions and appropriateness of investment opportunities as well as directing the Managing Members towards industries and companies that may be in need of the services of the General Partner. The non-Managing Members have significant experience and expertise in the financial service industry and in sourcing, structuring and negotiating privately-placed investments in publicly traded companies. Biographical information regarding the non-Managing Members is set forth below:
Andrew L. Farkas,
Non-Managing Member of the General Partner Andrew L. Farkas is a non-Managing Member of the General Partner. Mr. Farkas is the founder, Chairman and Chief Executive Officer of Insignia Financial Group, Inc. ('Insignia'), one of the largest real estate services companies in the world. Insignia operates worldwide, employing approximately 6,500 real estate professionals, with revenues of approximately $750 million annually. Insignia's residential businesses include Insignia Douglas Elliman, the largest residential brokerage firm in New York City, and Insignia Residential Group, the largest manager of cooperative and condominium housing in the New York metropolitan area, with a total portfolio of more than 60,000 units. The company operates its commercial real estate services businesses under Insignia/ESG in the U.S., Insignia Richard Ellis in the U.K., Insignia Bourdais in France and Insignia Brooke in Asia. Insignia also provides principal investment activities to complement its real estate services operations. Through its co-investment program, Insignia and its equity partners have invested in office, retail, hotel and multi-family residential properties valued at approximately $12 billion since 1990. Insignia's Development Group has built $200 million of office and industrial properties in the past five years, including one million square feet of property currently under development. Insignia's fund management business manages more than $1.5 billion of investment in real property and mortgage-backed securities. Insignia is also a member of Project Octane, a consortium of real estate service companies that is developing on-line procurement, transaction and enterprise resource planning platforms. In addition to his work for Insignia, Mr. Farkas serves on the Board of Directors of iStar Financial, a publicly traded real estate finance company. In 1983, Mr. Farkas founded Metropolitan Asset Group, Ltd., a private real estate investment banking and merchant banking firm. It was through Metropolitan Asset Group that he founded Insignia in 1990. Mr. Farkas graduated from Harvard University in 1982.
Thomas O. Hicks,
Non-Managing Member of the General Partner Thomas O. Hicks is a non-Managing Member of the General Partner. Mr. Hicks is Chairman of the firm Hicks, Muse, Tate, & Furst ('HMTF'), and has over 30 years of experience in leveraged acquisitions and private investments. Prior to forming HMTF, Mr. Hicks co-founded Hicks & Haas in 1983, and served as Co-Chairman and Co-Chief Executive Officer through 1989, which specialized in leveraged acquisitions during that period. From 1977 to 1983, Mr. Hicks was Co-Managing Partner of Summit Partners, a Dallas-based leveraged buyout and special situation investment firm. From 1974 to 1977, he served as President of First Dallas Capital Corporation, which was the venture capital affiliate of First National Bank of Dallas. Prior to this, he was an investment officer of the venture capital affiliate of Morgan Guaranty Trust Company of New York. Mr. Hicks serves on the board of directors of several HMTF portfolio companies, and also on the JPMorgan Chase National Advisory Board. Mr. Hicks received his B.B.A. from the University of Texas in 1968, and his M.B.A. from the University of Southern California in 1970.
The CEO Council will participate in a private meeting with Members of
the
U.S. Congress and staff to discuss issues affecting small business
issuers,
including amendments or exemptions to Sarbanes-Oxley. The meeting will
take
place on April 1st and attendance is by private invitation only.
The event is basically an opportunity to sit face to face with members
of
Congress and staff members that are both sympathetic to and against our
cause. I am told that Rep. Oxley will be in attendance as well as Rep.
Renzi
(R-AZ) who is a champion of small business, and others are being added
to
the list in the coming days.
We will have the opportunity to present a White Paper and to articulate
our
positions on all of the issues that confront small business issuers and
the
micro-capitalization stock market today.
I believe the Sarbanes-Oxley is a well intentioned law that needs to be
'right-sized' for small business issuers. As it stands today, the
yearly
cost of Sarbanes-Oxley compliance is beyond the means of most small
public
companies. If this law is allowed to stand, these companies will have
no
choice but to become unregulated entities or worse. While the intent of
Sarbanes-Oxley is to better regulate issuers and to protect investors,
the
net effect will be to drive small issuers away from regulation which
history
has shown causes a profoundly negative impact to shareholder value.
There are many issues and questions that need to be answered before we
can
move forward, some of them are --
- What amendments or exemptions are we looking for?
- What is our basis for requesting these amendments or exemptions?
- Do we want Congress to give the SEC full exemptive authority or to
make
changes to the law itself?
You can participate in a discussion on these and other topics at
http://forums.ceocouncil.net.
I know that many of you have studied Sarbanes-Oxley very carefully and
have
developed strong opinions that you have voiced to your clients,
colleagues
or professionals.
Now is the time to make us aware of these opinions, so that we may
voice
them in your behalf to the people who have the power to change the
regulatory environment for all small public companies.
As you know, this year many of our elected officials will be
particularly
sensitive to issues that affect jobs and our economy. Please help me
articulate the importance of a fair small business regulatory policy to
these government officials.
Thank you and best personal regards,
~ Steve
----------------------
THE CEO COUNCIL
'In the Public Interest'
Steven Crane
Director
Chairman - Political Action Committee
Direct Phone: 310.540.8851
Fax 310.540.7252
scrane@ceocouncil.net
http://www.ceocouncil.net
Going on Background
March 19, 2004
By Alex J. Stockham
With all that’s gone on in the world over the past three years, background checks have emerged as an essential piece of due diligence for private equity firms.
In addition to searching for possible links to terrorist organizations, private equity and venture capital firms are also on the lookout for other nefarious behavior, such as lies on resumes, hidden unsuccessful job tenures and unreported criminal indictments. While it may be rare that a potential investment’s manager or owner is a criminal, it needs to be checked. The firms hired, such as Kroll Inc., BackTrack Reports and James Mintz Group, to check into someone’s past say private equity industry players often use their services, but sometimes it’s already too late. A firm may have already made up it’s mind about investing.
According to Randy Shain, a co-founder of BackTrack Reports, private equity and venture capital firms will call him to check up on a prospective manager late in the deal cycle.
“Calls are invariably followed up by them saying they’re in a rush,” Shain says.
That adds up to firms not having learned the lessons they say they’ve learned over the past four years. While there has definitely been a “flight to quality” on the part of private equity firms and an increase in manager-centric strategies, the background check continues to come late in the game.
One reason, Shain says, is it is hard for private equity firms to justify the expense of a background report if a deal is not set to go through. After all, if the chances are slim that a manager will be backed, why go through the trouble of making sure they’re all that they say they are.
Peter Turecek, a managing director for Kroll Inc., adds that while it may appear to be cheaper to hire a background consulting firm when the deal is already close to being done, it may prove costly in the long run if a discrepancy is discovered.
“I always stress to clients that it’s always cheaper to do thorough due diligence at the front of a deal than doing damage control on the back side because a deal goes sour,” Turecek says.
If a deal does go south, not only do lawyer fees and advisor fees go up, but a firm also has to deal with the negative press. A damaged reputation is much more costly for a firm than a thorough background check on a manager.
BackTrack’s Shain says his firm may have come up with an intriguing - and rational - solution to get more business from private equity and venture capital firms. Basically, BackTrack’s fee depends on whether or not a deal goes through.
“We should be the first option - before attorneys and accountants,” Shain says. “The deals you don’t do, don’t pay as much. Pay us more on the ones you do.”
Turecek says he has seen an increase in the number of private equity firms utilizing background checking services, but there is still room for improvement.
“Firms are checking out new management and looking for skeletons in the closet before they invest,” Turecek says. “But until all companies are doing this, we’re not seeing enough of them doing it.”
Kroll Inc. has also been getting the word out about itself among the private equity and venture capital community, Turecek says. The firm has been sponsoring tables at conferences and speaking at seminars and sessions. He adds that his clients have been asking for Kroll to check out a manager that may be invested in and for potential hires at a portfolio company.
Private equity being an industry based on relationships, earlier background checks into management are a prudent thing to do, Shain says.
“Before you get emotionally attached to a deal, it makes sense to know who you are dealing with,” Shain says. “Meetings and dinners are nice, but it is by no means systematic. People think they can feel people out.”
Shain adds private equity’s comparison to baseball - where batting .300 with a few home runs and a few strikeouts is considered excellent - is misleading. It’s not that a strikeout in private equity was a risky deal that just went bad, it is probably a deal that shouldn’t have been done at all. There was no reason to be fooled by a pitch. Some of the headaches may have been avoided if firms would have looked into managers.
“People [firms] were investing with didn’t have the experience or reputation that would allow [a private equity firm] to succeed,” Shain says.
Despite thorough background checks, an indiscrepancy - even a major one - may not be enough to squash a deal. What ends a deal differs depending on the firm, Turecek says.
“Each client has a different threshold for pain,” Turecek says. “A lie about education may be enough to kill a deal.”
Other firms, Turecek says, have a much greater tolerance for manager impropriety. One Kroll client had the firm look into a manager that was discovered to have been the “bag man” - the person who takes the money from the client to the hit man - in a murder-for-hire more than a decade prior.
“The client said to keep looking,” Turecek says.
As the economy improves and private equity firms look to deploy capital, they’ll likely need background check services. Shain says his firm has seen a 20% increase in business from 12 months ago and they’re getting more calls from and for private equity firms. Rest assured, limited partners are doing their homework on their potential G.P.s as well. Shain says L.P.s tend to focus on the internal operations of a private equity firm as opposed to searching for criminal or unethical behavior.
One question limited partners will ask is what the turnover rate is like. If people have left, limited partners want to know why. If it’s just due to lack of lead flow, that’s one thing, but if there are larger issues, such as poor management from the top, that may be important for a limited partner to know.
It appears what is good for the goose is good for the gander. Conducting background checks have become part of running a stand-up business - something for which both sides of the private equity aisle can cheer.
Welsh Carson in $1.7B Cancer Services Privatization
March 22, 2004
New York-based private equity firm Welsh, Carson, Anderson & Stowe announced it acquired cancer-care services company US Oncology in a privatization valued at $1.7 billion.
The deal, which still must meet shareholder approval, calls for Welsh Carson to pay $15.05 per share in cash for the shares. The deal is valued at $1.7 billion, which includes consideration for outstanding stock options and the assumption of debt obligations after the privatization. The price-per-share Welsh Carson is paying reflects an 18.5% premium above the March 19 closing price of $12.70.
Welsh Carson already owned approximately 14.5% of the company’s shares and is attempting to acquire the rest. Welsh Carson was a founding investor of US Oncology in 1992. The firm also invested in the company in October 2001 and has steadily increased its holding in the company since that time.
US Oncology provides cancer-car services to affiliated practices and more than 875 doctors. The company also operates 78 cancer centers and cares for approximately 15% of the country’s new cancer cases each year. The company had revenues of $1.97 billion in 2003– up 19% from 2002.
“Welsh Carson has a long and successful track record investing in health care companies and we believe their experience and resources will be valuable as US Oncology continues to pursue its strategic objectives in enhancing access to high-quality cancer care,” R. Dale Ross, chairman and chief executive officer of US Oncology, said in the statement.
Welsh Carson declined to comment on the investment.
Welsh Carson used capital from its Welsh, Carson, Anderson & Stowe IX fund, which closed on $3.8 billion in 2001. The firm has done privatizations of healthcare companies in the past. In December 2002, the firm acquired AmeriPath, a provider of cancer diagnostics, genomic, and related information services, in a public-to-private buyout that values the company at $839.4 million.
Welsh, Carson, Anderson & Stowe was founded in 1979 and has raised more than $11 billion in 12 private investment partnerships. The firm has completed more than 200 investments.
Distressed securities can be defined as those publicly held and traded debt and equity securities of firms that have defaulted on their debt obligation and/or have filed for protection under Chapter 11 of the U.S. Bankruptcy Code. Distressed securities can include bank loans and other private debt of the same similar entities with operating and/or financial problems. Opportunities in the distressed debt market generally originate from companies that issue high yield debt and leveraged loans. These markets experienced dramatic growth through the 1990s. During 2002, roughly $510 billon of debt defaulted or became distressed, at a default rate of 12.8%, the highest level since 1991, which was believed to be the first distressed cycle.
The supply of distressed debt is now at an historic high that is only projected to grow. The default portion of the public high yield debt market has risen 43 % from the start of 2002. In addition, the credit quality of the high yield market is at an historic low and still declining, as these are all indications of a second distressed cycle which has created a lucrative opportunity for experienced investors operating in this asset class.
Defaulted debt securities have outperformed the S&P 500 Stock Index for the second year in a row and high yield bonds have significantly outperformed 10-year US treasury bonds in recent years. According to a McKinsey research report, portfolios of the same risk level would have performed better with the addition of distressed-debt securities (please refer to the attached presentation). Top defined-benefit plans doubled their allocation to distressed debt to more than $3 billion invested, which is 10 times their allocation 10 years ago. Demand continues to increase.
Not only has distressed debt has been one of the best performing asset classes over the past year but also, certain fund managers are confident because of the positive returns being maintained by a number of good-quality companies currently in distressed situations. In term of investment strategy, most private equity managers are implementing.
Control-oriented distressed funds are generating increased interest among institutional investors as they seek to acquire companies outright, through the purchase of debt, not equity. Control players salvage value by restructuring its operations and finances and, eventually, by selling their stake. Control play is considered to be the least risky of the distressed strategies because managers are able to influence the outcome of the portfolio companies.
There is another interesting dynamic in this strategy that institutional investors are finding quite intriguing. In the late 1990’s through early 2000, a number of middle market buyout firms implemented “roll up” strategies with a number of portfolio companies. In some cases the equity is severely impaired at these portfolio companies as the bonds are trading at significant discounts (one also has to wonder why private equity firms continue to hold these equity investments at costs!). A distressed manager looking to acquire the company through the date is very well positioned to create these companies at EBITDA multiple substantially lower than through equity.
An overview of the distressed market, by Norris Lam, CFA, of Links Private Equity in New York
http://www.privateequitycentral.net/index.cfm?member=yes
Staff Legal Bulletin on Remote Office Supervision
The Securities and Exchange Commission's Division of Market Regulation
has issued a staff legal bulletin on broker-dealers' need for vigilant
supervision of small, remote offices. Staff Legal Bulletin No. 17
(Mar. 19, 2004). The SEC and the NASD have long expressed concern about
the compliance challenges posed by broker-dealers with geographically
dispersed offices staffed by only a few people. The bulletin suggests an
approach to remote office supervision that includes clearly articulated
firm policies and procedures and steps to promote customer awareness,
with particular emphasis on unannounced inspections conducted on a
random, surprise basis. Although the bulletin focuses on remote offices, it
notes that these supervisory suggestions also may be relevant to
non-remote offices. The bulletin is available online at
http://www.sec.gov/interps/legal/mrslb17.htm
The cost of Nuclear Policy:
http://www.investorshub.com/boards/read_msg.asp?message_id=2661993
The estimated cost to clean up the nuclear waste industry currerntly is running at $1.7 trillion according to scientists working on a project to develop the capability to destroy toxic wastes in New Mexico.
America's Nuclear Arsenal: $5.5 Trillion Well-Spent?
The Hill—July 8, 1998
By David Silverberg
Just how much has the United States spent on its nuclear weapons and everything associated with them?
For anyone who has ever delved into government cost accounting, you know how monumental a task it is to determine the government's cost of anything. There's the issue of then-year versus current-year dollars, varying rates of inflation, and if you go back far enough, shifting fiscal years. Add to that the kind of secrecy, compartmentalization and bureaucracy that prevails in national security matters and you are left with a true Gordian knot.
That's why a new book—Atomic Audit: The Costs and Consequences of U.S. Nuclear Weapons Since 1940—is so remarkable. Issued on June 30 by the Brookings Institution Press, its editor, Stephen Schwartz, director of the U.S. Nuclear Weapons Cost Study Project and a visiting scholar at Brookings, and his team set out to determine the comprehensive costs of America's nuclear weapons program from 1940 to 1996, including the cost of research and development, production, deployment, delivery systems, infrastructure, storage and cleanup. (To view parts of it online, go to http://www.brook.edu/fp/projects/nucwcost/weapons.htm)
It took four years of sifting through government records, many of them previously classified, and doing rigorous analysis to come up with the bottom line: $5.5 trillion dollars. If future cleanup, stockpiling and dismantlement is included, that rises to $5.8 trillion. Even with the Cold War over, the United States is spending $35 billion a year—14 percent of the defense budget, or $96 million a day—on nuclear efforts of which about $25 billion goes for operation and maintenance of the nuclear arsenal. The rest is spent on cleanup, arms control verification, and ballistic missile defense research.
Even by government standards, that's a lot of money. Schwartz pointed out, and the media conveyed, the fact that this "exceeded the combined total federal spending on education, training, employment, and social services; agriculture; natural resources and the environment; general science and space research; community and regional development (including disaster relief); law enforcement; and energy production and regulation." The uncoordinated and fragmentary manner in which the nuclear arsenal was produced and funded, with interservice rivalries, secrecy, failed projects and duplication, drove up the cost.
This is true enough as far as it goes and Schwartz and his team have done a signal service in working through these numbers and putting the nuclear arsenal in fiscal perspective. But the work, and the conclusions, also have to be put into historical context.
The very fact that Schwartz was able to conduct this kind of survey is the result of the fact that the nuclear arsenal did in fact do its intended job: It deterred the Soviets and any other potential adversary. It kept the United States and its allies safe from aggression, preserving a government that could make expenditures on education, training, employment and a thousand and one civil pursuits.
Only the successful conclusion Cold War makes possible a survey of this sort. Only with the luxury of peace and a general turn toward economic pursuits are analysts prompted to view the nuclear arsenal from a financial perspective. During the depths of the Cold War, the arsenal had to be judged from the standpoint of threat, response and national security. Was the arsenal adequate? That was never entirely clear during the Cold War.
With the benefit of hindsight and objectivity, the waste, duplication and occasional foolishness become obvious. During the conflict, however, decisions were made on closely-held intelligence in an atmosphere of tension, ambiguity and fear. The money may not always have been well spent, but it is a good thing it was spent.
Perhaps the most important result of this work are Schwartz's conclusions: There should be an annual audit of the nuclear arsenal and its costs, and the President should play a more active role in formulating nuclear weapons policy and requirements. Schwartz also recommends greater public access to nuclear records. At a time when there is little urgency and reform can proceed calmly, these are salutary recommendations that Congress should heed.
The nuclear arsenal has been an object of controversy from the day it was created more than half a century ago. Schwartz's findings will not end its controversial nature. But he has certainly added clarity and comprehension to a debate that is vital to the future of the country.
David Silverberg is president of Silverberg Independent Media.
http://www.brook.edu/fp/projects/nucwcost/silverberg.htm
Sadly it is already biting all too hard.
http://www.brook.edu/fp/projects/nucwcost/silverberg.htm
Operation Tantra Burning the Bush Administration
In a worldwide exclusive story being developed by the Free and Clear Press Corps, a group of investigative journalists has uncovered a covert operation run two years ago in the Washington D.C. area called "Operation Tantra".
The secret project, run by a small group of muckraking journalists claims that certain male government officials from the State Department, the World Bank, the IMF, the Central Intelligence Agency, the FBI, the Federal Reserve Bank, the Comptroller of the Currency, the Securities and Exchange Commission, the Treasury Department and other high profile public officials paid sex workers large sums of taxpayers money for "tantra lessons".
A black schedule book with over 2,000 names, phone numbers and email addresses of government patrons was developed over an eighteen month period by two of the key players in the undercover operation which was designed to spy on government workers independent of any official government funding.
The Corps claims that enough evidence exists to bring down some very high ranking government officials who have engaged in paying for prostitution in the Washington D.C./Maryland area and as information is released the government will not be prosecuted in any federal court of law but by the Court of Public Opinion.
Members of the Press Corps were not available for any further immediate comments or interviews.
Why don't we just blow up the whole world and call it a day? EM
WWIII is engaged...it is the war on Terrorism
WWIV is about to begin...get your nuke bunkers ready!
Moron Sanity Testing
How do you tell the difference between Liberals, Conservatives and Southerners?
Pose the following question:
You're walking down a deserted street with your wife
and two small children. Suddenly, a dangerous looking man with a
huge knife comes around the corner, locks eyes with you, screams obscenities, raises the knife, and charges.
You are carrying a Glock .40, and you are an expert shot. You have mere seconds before he reaches you and your family.
What do you do?
Liberal Answer:
Well, that's not enough information to answer the
question! Does the man look poor or oppressed? Have I ever done anything to him that would inspire him to attack? Could we run away? What does my wife think? What about the kids? Could I possibly swing the gun like a club and knock the knife out of his hand? What does the law say about this situation? Does the Glock have an appropriate safety built into it?
Why am I carrying a loaded gun anyway, and what kind of message does this send to society and to my children? Is it possible he'd be happy with just killing me?
Does he definitely want to kill me, or would he be content just to wound me? If I were to grab his knees and hold on, could my
family get away while he was stabbing me?
Should I call 9-1-1?
Why is this street so deserted? We need to raise taxes, have a paint and weed day and make this a happier, healthier street that would discourage such behavior.
This is all so confusing! I need to debate this with some friends for a few days and try to come to a consensus.
Conservative Answer:
BANG!
Southerner's Answer :
BANG! BANG! BANG! BANG! BANG! BANG! BANG! BANG! BANG!
click...
(sounds of reloading).
Wife: "Hun, he looks like he's still moving, whadda
y'all kids think?"
Son: "Mama's right Daddy, I saw it, too."
BANG! BANG! BANG! BANG! BANG! BANG! BANG! BANG! BANG!
click.
Daughter: "Nice group, Daddy! Were those the
Winchester Silver Tips?"
If you ban me for this one you guys are, well....like Reagan said...there you go again...
How do you tell the difference between Liberals, Conservatives and Southerners?
Pose the following question:
You're walking down a deserted street with your wife
and two small children. Suddenly, a dangerous looking man with a
huge knife comes around the corner, locks eyes with you, screams obscenities, raises the knife, and charges.
You are carrying a Glock .40, and you are an expert shot. You have mere seconds before he reaches you and your family.
What do you do?
Liberal Answer:
Well, that's not enough information to answer the
question! Does the man look poor or oppressed? Have I ever done anything to him that would inspire him to attack? Could we run away? What does my wife think? What about the kids? Could I possibly swing the gun like a club and knock the knife out of his hand? What does the law say about this situation? Does the Glock have an appropriate safety built into it?
Why am I carrying a loaded gun anyway, and what kind of message does this send to society and to my children? Is it possible he'd be happy with just killing me?
Does he definitely want to kill me, or would he be content just to wound me? If I were to grab his knees and hold on, could my
family get away while he was stabbing me?
Should I call 9-1-1?
Why is this street so deserted? We need to raise taxes, have a paint and weed day and make this a happier, healthier street that would discourage such behavior.
This is all so confusing! I need to debate this with some friends for a few days and try to come to a consensus.
Conservative Answer:
BANG!
Southerner's Answer :
BANG! BANG! BANG! BANG! BANG! BANG! BANG! BANG! BANG!
click...
(sounds of reloading).
Wife: "Hun, he looks like he's still moving, whadda
y'all kids think?"
Son: "Mama's right Daddy, I saw it, too."
BANG! BANG! BANG! BANG! BANG! BANG! BANG! BANG! BANG!
click.
Daughter: "Nice group, Daddy! Were those the
Winchester Silver Tips?"
A friend sent me the joke and I don't know who made it up.
Just what I was looking for...shoot me before the piano player gets here...
Too bad that 45% of Registered American Voters still don't see that, but the percentages are changing daily...
Non Seq Qui
I've come on a few years from my Hollywood Highs
The best of the last, the cleanest star they ever had
I'm stiff on my legend, the films that I made
Forget that I'm fifty cause you just got paid
CHORUS
Crack, baby, crack, show me you're real
Smack, baby, smack, is that all that you feel
Suck, baby, suck, give me your head
Before you start professing that you're knocking me dead
You caught yourself a trick down on Sunset and Vine
But since he pinned you baby you're a porcupine
You sold me illusions for a sack full of cheques
You've made a bad connection 'cause I just want your sex
http://www.teenagewildlife.com/Albums/AS/CA.html
Seq Qui
Day after day
They send my friends away
To mansions cold and grey
To the far side of town
Where the thin men stalk the streets
While the sane stay underground
Day after day
They tell me I can go
They tell me I can blow
To the far side of town
Where it's pointless to be high
'Cause it's such a long way down
So I tell them that
I can fly, I will scream, I will break my arm
I will do me harm
Here I stand, foot in hand, talking to my wall
I'm not quite right at all...am I?
Don't set me free, I'm as heavy as can be
Just my librium and me
And my E.S.T. makes three
'Cause I'd rather stay here
With all the madmen
Than perish with the sadmen roaming free
And I'd rather play here
With all the madmen
For I'm quite content they're all as sane
As me
(Where can the horizon lie
When a nation hides
Its organic minds
In a cellar...dark and grim
They must be very dim)
Day after day
They take some brain away
Then turn my face around
To the far side of town
And tell me that it's real
Then ask me how I feel
Here I stand, foot in hand, talking to my wall
I'm not quite right at all
Don't set me free, I'm as helpless as can be
My libido's split on me
Gimme some good 'ole lobotomy
'Cause I'd rather stay here
With all the madmen
Than perish with the sadmen
Roaming free
And I'd rather play here
With all the madmen
For I'm quite content
They're all as sane as me
Zane, Zane, Zane
Ouvre le Chien (rpt)
http://www.teenagewildlife.com/Albums/TMWSTW/ATM.html
I love you,
So I drew these tides of men into my hands,
And wrote my will across the sky in stars,
To earn you freedom, the Seven-pillared worthy house,
That your eyes might be shining for me when we came.
lucidinsanity.com
I didn't know that fact. em
Storage Engine, Inc. provides document imaging solutions and fault-tolerant data storage solutions that store, protect and manage and replicate data in complex networks with greater ease and superior cost savings. The company’s Synchronism™ product line, as well as its Synchronix™ product line and Raven™ systems, are all modular units that can be configured and stacked to meet customers' specific and expanding data storage requirements. SEI is ISO-9001 certified and sells its products and services through its direct sales force and a network of qualified systems integrators.
SEI competes against companies such as EMC (NYSE:EMC), Network Appliance (NASDAQ:NTAP), Documentum (NASDAQ:DCTM), Filenet (NASDAQ:FILE) and Sun Microsystems (NASDAQ:SUNW), among others. The company distinguishes itself in the marketplace via the superior cost/performance ratio of its high-quality, fault-tolerant products. Trademarks mentioned herein may be trademarks and/or registered trademarks of their respective companies.
Storage Engine
Accelerating Information Access
Manufactured in the USA
Storage Engine Inc
One Sheila Drive
Tinton Falls, NJ 07724
Phone: (732) 747-6995
Fax: (732) 747-6542
Email: pata@storageengine.com
Web Site: http://www.eccs.com
Form 8-K for STORAGE ENGINE INC
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
8-Dec-2003
Regulation FD Disclosure
Item 9. Regulation FD Disclosure.
On December 5, 2003, Storage Engine, Inc. (the "Company") announced its receipt of a third party complaint in an action filed by the United States Attorney's office in Boston, Massachusetts against Dynamics Research Corporation. The full text of the press release issued in connection with the announcement is attached as Exhibit 99.1 to this Current Report on Form
8-K.
Storage Engine Announces Change to Board of Directors
Friday January 2, 5:00 pm ET
TINTON FALLS, N.J.--(BUSINESS WIRE)--Jan. 2, 2004--Storage Engine, Inc. (OTCBB: SENG - News) a provider of data storage solutions, document imaging solutions and fault tolerant information systems, today reported that Mr. Michael Faherty and Mr. Frank Triolo have resigned for personal reasons from the Board of Directors of Storage Engine effective December 31, 2003.
Mr. Gale Aguilar, who already holds a position on the Storage Engine Board, has been appointed to the role of Chairman of the Audit Committee. The Board is in the process of seeking additional Board candidates.
About Storage Engine, Inc. (SEI)
Storage Engine (SEI) is a provider of document imaging solutions and fault tolerant, cost effective data storage solutions for departments and enterprises that serve a wide range of business and government markets along with a wide range of document imaging solutions, conversion and other services to enable the capture, tracking, storing, sharing and utilization of information assets cost effectively. We provide fault tolerant information systems that store, protect, manage and replicate data in complex networks with greater ease and superior cost savings. The Company's Synchronism product line, as well as its Synchronix® product line and the Raven® systems, are modular units that can be configured and stacked to meet customers' specific and expanding data storage requirements. SEI sells its products through its direct sales force and a network of qualified systems integrators.
SEI competes against companies such as EMC (NYSE:EMC - News), Network Appliance (NASDAQ:NTAP - News), and Sun Microsystems (NASDAQ:SUNW - News); Documentum (DCTM) and FileNet (FILE), among others. The Company distinguishes itself in the marketplace via the superior cost/performance ratio of its high-quality, fault-tolerant products and satisfied customers. Trademarks mentioned herein may be trademarks and/or registered trademarks of their respective companies.
For more information, point your Web browser to www.storageengine.com, or call 1-800-322-7462.
This release contains forward-looking statements under the Federal Securities Laws. Actual results could vary materially. Factors that could cause actual results to vary materially include, but are not limited to: component quality and availability, changes in business conditions, changes in Storage Engine's sales strategy and product development plans, changes in the data storage or network marketplace, competition between Storage Engine and other companies that may be entering the data storage host/network attached markets, competitive pricing pressures, continued market acceptance of Storage Engine's open systems products, delays in the development of new technology, changes in customer buying patterns, one-time events and other important factors disclosed previously and from time-to-time in Storage Engine's filings at the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Contact:
Storage Engine, Inc.
Patricia Aberle, 732-747-6995 X333
Storage Engine Files Voluntary Petition for Chapter 11 Reorganization
Monday March 1, 6:05 pm ET
TINTON FALLS, N.J.--(BUSINESS WIRE)--March 1, 2004--Storage Engine, Inc. (OTCBB: SENG - News) a provider of fault tolerant information systems, data storage and document imaging solutions, announced today that the Company, along with all of its subsidiaries, has voluntarily filed for protection under Chapter 11 of the U.S. Bankruptcy Code with the U.S. Bankruptcy Court for the District of New Jersey. The Company intends to utilize the Chapter 11 process to reorganize its business and re-emerge shortly from this process, while continuing to provide service to its business customers and potential customers.
The Company emphasized that this Chapter 11 filing will not impact day-to-day operations with regard to its employees, customers and general business operations. Several non-essential employee positions have been eliminated.
"While this was a very difficult decision to make, given the current circumstances, we determined that we needed to take decisive action for our employees, customers and creditors, to maximize the value of our business," said a Company spokesman.
About Storage Engine, Inc. (SEI)
Storage Engine (SEI) is a provider of cost effective data storage solutions, and document imaging solutions for departments and enterprises that serve a wide range of business and government markets along with a wide range of other services to enable the capture, tracking, storing, sharing and utilization of information assets cost effectively.
This release contains forward-looking statements under the Federal Securities Laws. Actual results could vary materially. Factors that could cause actual results to vary materially include, but are not limited to: component quality and availability, changes in business conditions, changes in Storage Engine's sales strategy and product development plans, changes in the data storage or network marketplace, competition between Storage Engine and other companies that may be entering the data storage host/network attached markets, competitive pricing pressures, continued market acceptance of Storage Engine's open systems products, delays in the development of new technology, changes in customer buying patterns, one-time events and other important factors disclosed previously and from time-to-time in Storage Engine's filings at the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Contact:
Storage Engine, Inc.
Storage Engine files for bankruptcy protection
Monday March 1, 7:01 pm ET
SEATTLE, March 1 (Reuters) - Storage Engine Inc. (OTC BB:SENG.OB - News), a provider of computer systems used to store document images and data, said on Monday it filed for Chapter 11 bankruptcy protection after posting losses.
The Tinton Falls, New Jersey-based company, which also received a third-party summons as part of a civil lawsuit brought by the Boston U.S. Attorney's office against Dynamic Research Corp., said it would "reorganize its business and re-emerge shortly from this process, while continuing to provide service to its business customers and potential customers."
The bankruptcy filing will not "impact day-to-day operations with regard to its employees, customers and general business operations," the company said, "Several non-essential employee positions have been eliminated."