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.
Insider Trading: Information on Bounties
Section 21A(e) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 ("Exchange Act") [15 U.S.C. 78u-l(e)] authorizes the Securities and Exchange Commission ("Commission") to award a bounty to a person who provides information leading to the recovery of a civil penalty from an insider trader, from a person who "tipped" information to an insider trader, or from a person who directly or indirectly controlled an insider trader. This pamphlet is designed to provide interested persons with information on bounties and the Commission's rules for making a bounty application. Section 21A(e) of the Exchange Act and the Commission's bounty rules are set out at the end of this pamphlet.
What is "Insider Trading?"
"Insider trading" refers generally to buying or selling a security, in breach of a fiduciary duty or other relationship of trust and confidence, while in possession of material, nonpublic information about the security. Insider trading violations may also include "tipping" such information, securities trading by the person "tipped" and securities trading by those who misappropriate such information. Examples of insider trading cases that have been brought by the Commission are cases against: corporate officers, directors, and employees who traded the corporation's securities after learning of significant, confidential corporate developments; friends, business associates, family members, and other "tippees" of such officers, directors, and employees, who traded the securities after receiving such information; employees of law, banking, brokerage and printing firms who were given such information in order to provide services to the corporation whose securities they traded; government employees who learned of such information because of their employment by the government; and other persons who misappropriated, and took advantage of, confidential information from their employers.
Because insider trading undermines investor confidence in the fairness and integrity of the securities markets, the Commission has treated the detection and prosecution of insider trading violations as one of its enforcement priorities.
How Much May be Paid as a Bounty?
Insider trading may result in enforcement action by the Commission or in criminal prosecution by the Department of Justice. The Exchange Act permits the Commission to bring suit against insider traders to seek injunctions, which are court orders that prohibit violations of the law under threat of fines and imprisonment. The Commission may also seek other relief against insider traders, including recovery of any illegal gains (or losses avoided) and payment of a civil penalty. The amount of a civil penalty can be up to three times the profit gained (or loss avoided) as a result of insider trading.
The Commission is permitted to make bounty awards from the civil penalties that are actually recovered from violators. With minor exceptions, any person who provides information leading to the imposition of a civil penalty may be paid a bounty. However the total amount of bounties that may be paid from a civil penalty may not exceed ten percent of that penalty.
How Will the Commission Make Bounty Determinations?
All Commission determinations regarding bounties including whether to make a payment, to whom a payment shall be made, and the amount of a payment (if any), are in the sole discretion of the Commission. Any such determination is final and not subject to judicial review. Nothing in the Commission's rules or in this pamphlet is intended to limit the Commission's discretion with respect to bounties.
In making determinations regarding bounty applications the Commission will be guided by the purposes of the bounty provisions. These purposes include the intent of the United States Congress to encourage persons with information about possible insider trading to come forward. The Commission will also consider other factors that it deems relevant. Examples of other factors that may be relevant are: the importance of the information provided by an applicant; whether the information was provided voluntarily; the existence of other applications in the matter; and the amount of the penalty from which bounties may be paid.
Normally, the Commission will not make any determination on a bounty application until a payment of a penalty is both ordered by a court and recovered. A person who files an application meeting the requirements of the Commission's rules will be notified of the Commission's determination on the application.
How and When Do You Apply for a Bounty?
An application must be clearly marked as an "Application for Award of a Bounty," and must contain the information required by the Commission's rules. The application must give a detailed statement of the information that the applicant has about the suspected insider trading.
Any person who desires to provide information to the Commission that may result in the payment of a bounty may do so by any means desired. The Commission encourages persons having information regarding insider trading to provide that information in writing, either at the time they initially provide the information to the Commission or as soon as possible afterwards. Providing information in writing reduces the possibility of error, helps assure that appropriate action will be taken, and minimizes subsequent burdens and the possibility of factual disputes. In any event, a written application for a bounty must be filed within 180 days after the day on which the court orders payment of the civil penalty.
Can You Apply for a Bounty Anonymously?
The Commission recognizes that there may be instances when a bounty applicant wishes to remain temporarily anonymous. The bounty rules take these instances into account. While the Commission will only award bounties to applicants who provide their identity and mailing address, that information may be added by a later amendment to the application. The amendment must be filed within 180 days after the entry of the court order requiring the payment of the penalty upon which the bounty is based. An anonymous applicant who fails to file such an amendment (and anyone who fails to make a written application) runs the risk of losing eligibility for a bounty through lapse of time and ignorance of the fact that a penalty has been recovered.
Absent compelling cause, the Commission ordinarily does not disclose the identity of a confidential source. In some instances however disclosure of that identity will be legally required, or will be essential for the protection of the public interest. For example, a court may order disclosure during litigation, or the Commission may need to present the testimony of a bounty claimant to ensure the success of an enforcement action. Consequently while the Commission and its staff will give serious consideration to requests to maintain the confidentiality of a source's identity, no guarantees of confidentiality are possible.
Statutory and Regulatory Provisions
Section 21A(e) of the Exchange Act
[T]here shall be paid from amounts imposed as a penalty under this section and recovered by the Commission or the Attorney General, such sums, not to exceed 10 percent of such amounts, as the Commission deems appropriate to the person or persons who provide information leading to the imposition of such penalty. Any determinations under this subsection, including whether, to whom, or in what amount to make payment, shall be in the sole discretion of the Commission, except that no such payment shall be made to any member, officer, or employee of any appropriate regulatory agency, the Department of Justice, or a self-regulatory organization. Any such determination shall be final and not subject to judicial review.
Subpart C of Part 201 of Title 17 of the Code of Federal Regulations
Procedures Pertaining to the Payment of Bounties Pursuant to Subsection 21A(e) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934
Rule 61 Scope of subpart
Section 21A of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 authorizes the courts to impose civil penalties for certain violations of that Act. Subsection 21A(e) permits the Commission to award bounties to persons who provide information that leads to the imposition of such penalties. Any such determination, including whether, to whom, or in what amount to make payments, is in the sole discretion of the Commission. This subpart sets forth procedures regarding applications for the award of bounties pursuant to subsection 21A(e). Nothing in this subpart shall be deemed to limit the discretion of the Commission with respect to determinations under subsection 21A(e) or to subject any such determination to judicial review.
Rule 62 Application required.
No person shall be eligible for the payment of a bounty under subsection 21A(e) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 unless such person has filed a written application that meets the requirements of this subpart and, upon request, provides such other information as the Commission or its staff deems relevant to the application.
Rule 63 Time and place of filing.
Each application pursuant to this subpart and each amendment thereto must be filed within one hundred eighty days after the entry of the court order requiring the payment of the penalty that is subject to the application. Such applications and amendments shall be addressed to: Office of the Secretary, Securities and Exchange Commission, 450 Fifth Street N.W., Washington, D.C., 20549.
Rule 64 Form of application and information required.
Each application pursuant to this subpart shall be identified as an Application for Award of a Bounty and shall contain a detailed statement of the information provided by the applicant that the applicant believes led or may lead to the imposition of a penalty. Except as provided by Rule 65 of this subpart, each application shall state the identity and mailing address of, and be signed by, the applicant. When the application is not the means by which the applicant initially provides such information, each application shall contain: the dates and times upon which, and the means by which, the information was provided; the identity of the Commission staff members to whom the information was provided; and, if the information was provided anonymously, sufficient further information to confirm that the person filing the application is the same person who provided the information to the Commission.
Rule 65 Identity and signature.
Applications pursuant to this subpart may omit the identity, mailing address, and signature of the applicant; provided that such identity, mailing address and signature are submitted by an amendment to the application. Any such amendment must be filed within one hundred eighty days after the entry of the court order requiring the payment of the penalty that is subject to the application.
Rule 66 Notice to applicants.
The Commission will notify each person who files an application that meets the requirements of this subpart, at the address specified in such application, of the Commission's determination with respect to such person's application. Nothing in this subpart shall be deemed to entitle any person to any other notice from the Commission or its staff.
Rule 67 Applications by legal guardians.
An application pursuant to this subpart may be filed by an executor, administrator, or other legal representative of a person who provides information that may be subject to a bounty payment or by the parent or guardian of such a person if that person is a minor. Certified copies of the letters testamentary, letters of administration, or other similar evidence showing the authority of the legal representative to file the application must be annexed to the application.
Rule 68 No promises of payment.
No person is authorized under this subpart to make any offer or promise, or otherwise to bind the Commission with respect to the payment of any bounty or the amount thereof.
Source: SEC Form 2222 (6-89)
http://www.sec.gov/divisions/enforce/insider.htm
Maybe they should pay you $300,000 bounty to uncover the insider trading at United Defense Industries and the Carlyle Group, then you could be rid of your debt and do something more constructive than harrassing people on Raging Bull. Why don't you publish the list of people who recieved a bounty over the past ten years or since the policy was adopted?
Neocons. EM
D nile is a long river in Egypt, may you rest in peace!
None, I would have you arrested the first time under rule of law, but the Bush doctrine is not based on rule of law, it is based on rule of power, and you make the rules after you excercise your power, and your power has corrupted you and all of your minions to the point of no return. Your end is far too near for your own myopic senses to relish the release of pain that comes from death.
Couldn't tell you, I don't vote, and even if I could, I wouldn't vote for either party, instead I would crush the government with my words and build a new one. That is what is going to happen anyway when those less stupid realize they have been boondoggled again! There is no politician alive today with clean hands. The bloodstains of humanity are on their fingertips.
The only reason you only criticise the critics is that you know they are right and you can't do anything about your own stupid leader who is heading your entire country into a suicide. They didn't listen in Britain when it adopted a supremacist arrogance and thus went the British Empire. So follows the American imperialists. Stupid people are already walking around like dead people, they just haven't been buried yet! May you and your unborn children rest in peace!
You certainly wouldn't recognize an ass if it was sitting on your face, that must make you one of the stupid Americans who are planning to vote for Bush again. Watch as your economy collapses under your stupid foreign policy. Buffet and Soros both short billions of US Dollars. Is Buffet an ass too?
Freedom is a gift we should always fight for, otherwise we will lose it forever. But force always begets more force. You would think a President who claims to be annointed by God and a Christian would know that. He obviously doesn't get it and thus it makes him totally the stupidest person in this country.
There is already too much censorship in this country. There is also information the public should know but doesn't under the cover of "national security".
I don't believe that any American is bad, just that too many of them are stupid. Stupid people do stupid things that impact the lives of the wiser.
My criticisms are aimed at stupid Americans, you are not one of them obviously.
As a human, it makes no difference if I am an alien, we all have the same inalienable rights.
The Bush Doctrine is a bad policy. The war on Terror is a disasterous position on foreign policy. Only the most stupid will continue to follow it and endorse it.
I don't need to do anything under a Supremacist democracy other than to show people how stupid they really are. I am doing that in many ways, and your government has attempted to censor me already.
They will succeed in some ways financially because they have what appears to be unlimited resources, and win the small battles they may, but ultimately they will lose the war, because the truth and justice triumphs always in the end.
How you can change things is to start by investigating and bringing to justice your very own government and making sure the right wing supremacists do not get re-elected.
I don't vote, but you sure can, and my two children who are not yet old enough to vote who are American born may some day thank you and all the wiser Americans for it!
Start with bringing down the neocon supremacists and their stupidist leader, George W. Bush. The war of words has already begun, but your government drew first blood a long, long time ago!
Start also with tracing where the government spent the most money since raising the national debt limit and how many of those who drank of the largess totalling over 1 trillion dollars contributed to the $150 million current ad campaign launched by the Bushies.
Therein you will find the biggest terrorists on the planet!
http://web.amnesty.org/library/Index/ENGEUR410042004
The number of stupid people planning to vote for George Bush is running at around 46%. Stupidity increases in direct proportion to the number of lies believed by the populace to be truth. The Bush propaganda machine is burning up.
You are right, the American population has not increased by that much, but the quality of our education system has not either. Do some research on college enrollments, graduations, drop outs, and how difficult college graduates are finding it to locate a good job and you will get the point of the post. No child left behind? How stupid was that program? $160 billion could have funded a lot of college educations. Amazing how you can ram through a Patriot Act in six weeks and take decades to solve the problems of education in this country.
No problemo...enjoy the crisis...
Algeria: "Disappearances" must be on presidential election agenda
Six months on from the establishment of an ad hoc mechanism to look into the issue of "disappearances", Amnesty International urges all candidates in the presidential elections scheduled for 8 April to pledge their commitment to guaranteeing truth, justice and reparations for the thousands of families whose relatives "disappeared" in Algeria during the 1990s.
Amnesty International echoes the declaration made at the end of a seminar in Paris on 28 February 2004 organized by the Collectif des familles de disparu(e)s en Algérie (Collective of Families of the Disappeared in Algeria), which recalled the Algerian state's obligations under international law to establish the truth about "disappearances" cases, bring those responsible to justice and provide reparations for the victims.
The ad hoc mechanism on "disappearances" was established on the basis of a presidential decree dated 11 September 2003 and charged with serving as an interface between the Algerian authorities and families of the "disappeared".
Amnesty International is concerned that, among other things, the mechanism has only limited powers to gather information on "disappearances" cases and no mandate to identify those responsible for acts of "disappearance". In addition, its members do not include any representative of the families of the "disappeared". In view of these limitations, there is concern that it may not lead to the full, independent and impartial investigations necessary to provide families with verifiable information concerning the fate and whereabouts of their relatives, nor contribute to ending the impunity from which those responsible for "disappearances" continue to benefit.
There is a yawning gap between what can be achieved within the narrow mandate of the ad hoc mechanism and what must be done to ensure the rights to truth, justice and reparations of families of the "disappeared". Amnesty International calls on all presidential candidates to declare that they will guarantee this gap is bridged without delay.
Background
Since 1992, particularly between the years 1993 and 1998, thousands of men and women have "disappeared" in Algeria after being arrested by members of the security forces or abducted by state-armed militias. Amnesty International has compiled information on around 4,000 cases of "disappearance", but acknowledges that its records are far from comprehensive and that the true figure may therefore be significantly higher. The organization believes that, given the widespread and systematic nature of the violations, they constitute crimes against humanity.
Since 1998 families of the "disappeared" have held regular peaceful demonstrations outside state institutions in various Algerian cities to protest at the authorities' failure to take their concerns seriously. They have also organized themselves into associations to coordinate their campaigning work, but to date have been unable to legally register them.
The issue of "disappearances" is just one aspect of the traumatic legacy of over a decade of violence, in which armed groups, the security forces and state-armed militias have been responsible for gross human rights abuses. For more information, see Amnesty International's latest report Algeria: Steps towards change or empty promises? (AI Index: MDE 28/005/2003), published on 16 September 2003, and the press release Algeria: New "disappearances" mechanism must lead to full investigations (AI Index: MDE 28/010/2003), published on 22 September 2003.
http://web.amnesty.org/library/index/engmde280042004
Are American's disappearing yet?
I live in America just like you...but I am not an American. That should be too obvious to the well informed!
"The Bush doctrine is built on two pillars: First, the United States will do everything in its power to maintain its unquestioned military supremacy, and second, the United States arrogates the right to preemptive action. Taken together, these two pillars support two classes of sovereignty: the sovereignty of the United States, which takes precedence over international treaties and obligations, and the sovereignty of all other states, which is subject to the Bush doctrine. This is reminiscent of George Orwell's Animal Farm: All animals are equal but some are more equal than others.
To be sure, the Bush doctrine is not stated so starkly; it is buried in Orwellian doublespeak. The doublespeak is needed because there is a contradiction between the Bush administration's concepts of freedom and democracy and the principles of open society."
George Soros
Looks like it doesn't take much ranting to get banned from the Rant and Chat Board. PhilBullRider banned me because I wouldn't tell him what country I lived in? How stupid is that?
Looks like NITE and AMTD are going to be taking some hits this week.
"The Bush doctrine is built on two pillars: First, the United States will do everything in its power to maintain its unquestioned military supremacy, and second, the United States arrogates the right to preemptive action. Taken together, these two pillars support two classes of sovereignty: the sovereignty of the United States, which takes precedence over international treaties and obligations, and the sovereignty of all other states, which is subject to the Bush doctrine. This is reminiscent of George Orwell's Animal Farm: All animals are equal but some are more equal than others.
To be sure, the Bush doctrine is not stated so starkly; it is buried in Orwellian doublespeak. The doublespeak is needed because there is a contradiction between the Bush administration's concepts of freedom and democracy and the principles of open society."
George Soros
Americans Stupid Sense of Humor
Leave it to some dumb Americans to joke about and degrade their own miserable existence as they tread with sky high debts and an economy about to be put asunder.
Ranting away and some people wanna know what country I live in? That is stupid!
Here are my sentiments exactly:
http://www.investorshub.com/boards/read_msg.asp?message_id=2599654
America's Global Role
Why the Fight for a Worldwide Open Society Begins at Home
George Soros
The American Prospect
May 27, 2003
May 27, 2003—At the invitation of then–Dean Paul Wolfowitz, I delivered a commencement address at the Paul H. Nitze School of Advanced International Studies in Washington. I spoke about my vision for a global open society and Wolfowitz, now deputy secretary of defense, seemed to be on the same wavelength. We had both participated in a small group called The Action Council for the Balkans, which was agitating for a more muscular policy against Slobodan Milosevic. We advocated military intervention in Bosnia much sooner than it happened. I remember a lively exchange with Colin Powell when I questioned the Powell doctrine of "we do deserts but we don't do mountains." I was very supportive of Madeleine Albright's activism on Kosovo, where I was in favor of a coalition of the willing: NATO intervention without United Nations authorization.
On March 7, 2003, on the eve of war with Iraq, I gave another speech at the same graduate school. This article is adapted from that speech. I was then and continue to be in favor of the removal from power of Saddam Hussein, who was, because of his chemical and biological weapons, an even more dangerous despot than Milosevic. I would like to see regime change in many other places. I am particularly concerned about Zimbabwe, where Robert Mugabe's regime is going from bad to worse. I also see Muammar Quaddafi as a dangerous troublemaker in Africa. I support a project on Burma, or Myanmar as it is now called, which backs Aung San Suu Kyi as the democratically elected leader. I have foundations in central Asia, and I would like to see regime change in countries such as Turkmenistan. And, of course, I hoped for an easy victory in Iraq, if we went to war at all.
Yet I am profoundly opposed to the Bush administration's policies, not only in Iraq but altogether. My opposition is much more profound than it was in the case of the Clinton administration. I believe the Bush administration is leading the United States and the world in the wrong direction. In the past, my philanthropy focused on defeating communism and helping with the transition from closed societies to open societies in the former Soviet empire. Now I would go so far as to say that the fight for a global open society has to be fought in the United States. In short, America ought to play a very different role in the world than it is playing today.
Because open society is an abstract idea, I shall proceed from the abstract and general to the concrete and particular. The concept of "open society" was developed by philosopher Karl R. Popper, whose book Open Society and Its Enemies argued that totalitarian ideologies—such as communism and fascism—posed a threat to an open society because they claimed to have found the final solution. The ultimate truth is beyond human reach. Those who say they are in possession of it are making a false claim, and they can enforce it only by coercion and repression. So Popper derived the principles of freedom and democracy—the same principles that President Bush championed in his February speech on Iraq—from the recognition that we may be wrong.
That brings us to the crux of the matter. Bush makes absolutely no allowance for the possibility that we may be wrong, and he has no tolerance for dissenting opinion. If you are not with us you are against us, he proclaims. Donald Rumsfeld berates our European allies who disagree with him on Iraq in no uncertain terms, and he has a visceral aversion to international cooperation, be it with NATO or UN peacekeepers in Afghanistan. And [Attorney General] John Ashcroft accuses those who opposed the USA Patriot Act of giving aid and comfort to the enemy. These are the views of extremists, not adherents to an open society. Perhaps because of my background, these views push the wrong buttons in me. And I am amazed and disappointed that the general public does not have a similar allergic reaction. Of course, that has a lot to do with September 11.
But the trouble goes much deeper. It is not merely that the Bush administration's policies may be wrong, it is that they are wrong, and I would go even further: They are bound to be wrong because they are based on a false ideology. A dominant faction within the Bush administration believes than international relations are relations of power. Because we are unquestionably the most powerful, they claim, we have earned the right to impose our will on the rest of the world.
This position is enshrined in the Bush doctrine that was first enunciated in the president's speech at West Point in June 2002 and then incorporated in the National Security Strategy last September.
The Bush doctrine is built on two pillars: First, the United States will do everything in its power to maintain its unquestioned military supremacy, and second, the United States arrogates the right to preemptive action. Taken together, these two pillars support two classes of sovereignty: the sovereignty of the United States, which takes precedence over international treaties and obligations, and the sovereignty of all other states, which is subject to the Bush doctrine. This is reminiscent of George Orwell's Animal Farm: All animals are equal but some are more equal than others.
To be sure, the Bush doctrine is not stated so starkly; it is buried in Orwellian doublespeak. The doublespeak is needed because there is a contradiction between the Bush administration's concepts of freedom and democracy and the principles of open society.
In an open society, people can decide for themselves what they mean by freedom and democracy. But the Bush administration claims that we have discovered the ultimate truth. The very first sentence of our latest National Security Strategy reads as follows:
"The great struggles of the twentieth century between liberty and totalitarianism ended with a decisive victory for the forces of freedom—and a single sustainable model for national success: freedom, democracy, and free enterprise."
This statement is false on two counts. First, there is no single, sustainable model for national success. And second, our model, which has been successful, is not available to others because our success depends greatly on our dominant position at the center of the global capitalist system, and that position is not attainable by others.
According to the ideologues of the far right, who currently dominate the Bush administration, the success of the American model has been brought about by a combination of market fundamentalism in economic matters and the pursuit of military supremacy in international relations. These two objectives fit neatly together into a coherent ideology—an ideology that is internally consistent but does not jibe with reality or with the principles of open society. It is a kind of crude social Darwinism in which the survival of the fittest depends on competition, not cooperation. In the economy, the competition is among firms; in international relations, among states. Cooperation does not seem necessary because there is supposed to be an invisible hand at work that will ensure that as long as everybody looks out for his or her own interests, the common interest will look after itself.
This doctrine is false, even with regard to the economy. Financial markets left to their own devices do not tend toward an equilibrium that guarantees the optimum allocation of resources. The theories of efficient markets and rational expectations don't stand up to critical examination. But at least these theories exist, and they are widely accepted.
No similar theory can reasonably be proposed with regard to international relations. There is the well-known doctrine of geopolitical realism according to which states have interests but no principles. But nobody can deny that there are common human interests that transcend national interests.
We live in an increasingly interdependent world and, due to the progress of technology, our power over nature has increased by leaps and bounds. Unless we use that power wisely, we are in danger of damaging or destroying both our environment and our civilization. These are not empty words. Terrorism and the spread of weapons of mass destruction give us a taste of what lies ahead. The need for a better world order predates September 11, but the terrorist threat has rendered international cooperation all the more necessary.
That is not how the Bush administration sees the world. Its perspective is not totally false but it emphasizes one aspect of reality to the exclusion of others. The aspect it stresses is power, and in particular military power. But military power is not the only kind of power; no empire could ever be held together by military power alone. Joseph S. Nye Jr., in his recent book The Paradox of American Power, introduced the concept of "soft power" to bring the point home.
I would go even further. Applying the concept of power to human affairs is altogether questionable. In physics, power or force governs the behavior of objects. That is a misleading analogy for human affairs. People have a will of their own. They may be cowed by military power or other forms of repression, but that is not a sound principle of social organization. Might is not right.
Yet that is the belief that guides the Bush administration. Israel's Ariel Sharon shares the same belief, and look where that has led. The idea that might is right cannot be reconciled with the idea of an open society.
The objective of disarming Saddam Hussein was a valid one, but the way the U.S. government has gone about it is not. That is why there was so much opposition to the war throughout the world and at home. That is why I shall remain opposed to the Bush administration's conduct of foreign policy.
There is an alternative vision of the role that the United States ought to play in the world, and it is based on the concept of open society. The current world order is a distorted form of a global open society. It is distorted because we have global markets but we do not have global political institutions. As a consequence, we are much better at producing private goods than taking care of public goods such as preserving peace, protecting the environment and ensuring economic stability, progress and social justice. This is not by accident.
Globalization—and by that I mean the globalization of financial markets—was a market fundamentalist project, and the United States was its chief architect. We are also the chief beneficiary. We are unquestionably the dominant power in the world today. Our dominance is not only economic and financial but also military and technological. No other country can even come close to us.
This puts us in a position of unique responsibility. Other countries have to respond to U.S. policy, but the United States is in a position to choose the policy to which others have to respond. We have a greater degree of discretion than anybody else in deciding what shape the world should take. Therefore it is not enough for the United States to preserve its supremacy over other states; it must also concern itself with the well-being of the world.
There were great tensions in the global capitalist system prior to September 11, but they have gotten much worse since then. We must work to reduce the tensions and make the system stable and equitable so that we can maintain our dominant position within it.
That is the responsibility that we fail to live up to. Worse, the Bush administration does not even acknowledge that we bear such a responsibility. It attributes our dominant position to the success of the American model in fair competition with other countries. But that is a self-deception.
Contrary to the tenets of market fundamentalism, the global capitalist system does not constitute a level playing field. In economic and financial matters, there is a disparity between the center and the periphery. And in military matters, there is a disparity between the United States and the rest of the world because the European Union, as distinct from its member states, does not seek to be a military power. There are large and growing inequalities in the world, and we lack the mechanism for reducing them. Therefore we need to strengthen our international political institutions to match the globalization of our markets. Only the United States can lead the way because without U.S. participation, nothing much can be done in the way of international cooperation.
A world order based on the sovereignty of states, moreover, cannot take care of our common human interests. The main source of poverty and misery in the world today is bad government—repressive, corrupt regimes and failed states. And yet it is difficult to intervene in the internal affairs of other countries because the principle of sovereignty stands in the way.
One way to overcome the problem is to offer countries positive inducements for becoming open societies. That is the missing ingredient in the current world order. There are penalties for bad behavior, from trade sanctions to military intervention, but not enough incentives and reinforcements for good behavior. A global open society would achieve certain standards by providing assistance to those who are unable to meet them. States that violate the standards could be punished through exclusion. There would be a better balance between rewards and reinforcements on the one hand and penalties on the other. In a global open society, every country would benefit from belonging to it. Developing countries would get better access to markets under the World Trade Organization. Countries at the periphery, such as Brazil, would be guaranteed an adequate supply of credit through the International Monetary Fund as long as they followed sound policies, and there would be a genuine attempt to meet the UN's millennium goals of reducing poverty and improving lives throughout the world.
Providing incentives, of course, would not be sufficient. Not all countries have governments that want or tolerate an open society. A rogue regime such as Saddam Hussein's was a threat to the rest of the world, and a global open society must be able to defend itself. But the use of military force must remain a last resort.
The United States cannot create a global society on its own. No single country can act as the police officer or the benefactor of the entire world. But a global open society cannot be achieved without American leadership. This means that the United States must engage in international cooperation. It must be willing to abide by the rules it seeks to impose on others, to accept its share of the costs and, most importantly, to accept that other participants are bound to have other opinions, and other states other national interests. The United States will always have veto rights due to its weight and importance.
Here is an alternative vision of America's role in the world. It is the vision of America leading the world toward a global open society. Such a vision is badly needed. After September 11, President Bush has managed to convince the country that it is unpatriotic to disagree with him.
The two visions—American supremacy and America as the leader of a global open society—are not that far apart. In fact, they are so close to each other that I am afraid that when the pursuit of American supremacy fails—as it is bound to fail—the vision of a global open society will also be abandoned. That is why it is so important to distinguish between them.
Both visions recognize the dominant position of the United States. Both agree that the United States has to take an active leadership role in international affairs. Both favor preemptive action. But when it comes to the kind of preemptive action that America ought to take, the two visions differ. A global open society requires affirmative action on a global scale while the Bush approach is restricted to punitive action. In the open-society version, crisis prevention cannot start early enough; it is impossible to predict which grievance will develop into bloodshed, and by the time we know, it is too late. That is why the best way to prevent conflicts is to foster open societies.
The Bush administration claims to be fostering democracy by invading Iraq. But democracy cannot be imposed from the outside. I have been actively involved in building open societies in a number of countries through my network of foundations. Speaking from experience, I would never choose Iraq for nation building.
Military occupation is the easy part; what comes afterward is what should give us pause. The internal tensions and the external ones with neighboring countries such as Turkey and Iran will make it very difficult to establish a democratic Iraqi regime. To impose a military regime as Douglas MacArthur did in post–World War II Japan would be to court disaster.
It would have been easier to achieve success in Afghanistan because both the Taliban and al-Qaeda were alien oppressors. But having won a resounding military victory, we failed to follow through with nation building. Secretary Rumsfeld opposed the extension of UN peacekeeping beyond Kabul, and, as a result, law and order have still not been fully established outside the capital. Hamid Karzai needs to be protected by American bodyguards. His government is making slow progress, but the historic opportunity to build on the momentum of liberation was irretrievably lost.
The war with Iraq does not help the building of open societies in other countries, either. In our efforts to gain allies and buy votes in the United Nations, we have become less concerned with internal conditions in those countries than we ought to be. This is true of Russia and Pakistan and all the central Asian republics, not to mention Angola and Cameroon, which are among the most corrupt regimes in Africa. To claim that we are invading Iraq for the sake of establishing democracy is a sham, and the rest of the world sees it as such. The Atlantic Alliance has been severely disrupted, and both NATO and the European Union are in disarray.
Disarming Iraq is a valid objective, but with regard to weapons of mass destruction, Iraq ought not to be the top priority today. North Korea is much more dangerous, and it has to be said that President Bush precipitated the current crisis. North Korea's nuclear program had been more or less contained in 1994 by the Agreed Framework concluded by the Clinton administration. In the meantime, President Kim Dae Jung of South Korea had engaged in a sunshine policy, and it began to bear fruit. There was progress in removing land mines along the border, and a direct train connection was about to be opened. The North Korean leadership seemed to become increasingly aware that it needed economic reforms.
When Kim Dae Jung came to Washington as the first foreign head of state to visit President Bush, he wanted to enlist the president's support for the sunshine policy. But Bush rebuffed him rather brusquely and publicly. Bush disapproved of what he regarded as the appeasement of North Korea, and he was eager to establish a discontinuity with the Clinton administration. He also needed North Korea out in the cold in order to justify the first phase of the National Missile Defense program, the initial linchpin in the Bush strategy of asserting U.S. supremacy. Then came the "axis of evil" speech, and when North Korea surprised the Bush administration by admitting its uranium-enrichment program (strictly speaking not in violation of the Agreed Framework because that covered only plutonium), Bush cut off the supply of fuel oil. North Korea responded with various provocations.
As this magazine goes to press, North Korea could soon start producing a nuclear bomb a month. In mid-April, it backed off its demand for bilateral talks with the United States and agreed to three-way talks with the United States and China. But a serious rift between the United States and South Korea remains. South Koreans now regard the United States as being as much of an aggressor as North Korea, and this renders our position very difficult.
The Bush administration's policies have brought about many unintended, adverse consequences. Indeed, it is difficult to find a similar time span during which political and economic conditions have deteriorated as rapidly as they have in the last couple of years.
But the game is not yet over. The quick victory in Iraq could bring about a dramatic change in the overall situation. The price of oil could fall, the stock market could celebrate, consumers could overcome their anxieties and resume spending, and business could respond by stepping up capital expenditures. The United States could reduce its dependency on Saudi Arabia, the Israeli-Palestinian conflict could become more tractable and negotiations with North Korea could calm tensions with Pyongyang. That is what the Bush administration is counting on.
The jury is out. But whatever the outcome in Iraq, I predict that the Bush approach is bound to fail eventually because it is based on false premises. I base my prediction on my theory of reflexivity and my study of boom-bust processes, or bubbles, in the financial markets.
Bubbles do not grow out of thin air. They have a solid basis in reality, but misconception distorts reality. In this case, the dominant position of the United States is the reality, the pursuit of American supremacy the misconception. For a while, reality can reinforce the misconception, but eventually it is bound to become unsustainable. During the self-reinforcing phase, the misconception seems irresistible but, unless it is corrected earlier, a dramatic reversal becomes inevitable. The later it comes the more devastating the consequences. There seems to be an inexorable quality about the course of events, but, of course, a boom-bust process can be aborted at any stage. Most stock-market booms are aborted long before the extremes of the recent bull market are reached. The sooner it happens, the better. That is how I feel about the Bush doctrine.
I firmly believe that President Bush is leading the United States and the world in the wrong direction and I consider it nothing short of tragic that the terrorist threat has induced the country to line up behind him so uncritically. The Bush administration came into office with an unsound and eventually unsustainable ideology. Prior to September 11, it could not make much headway in implementing its ideology because it lacked a clear mandate and a clearly defined enemy. September 11 changed all that. The terrorist attack removed both constraints.
Terrorism is the ideal enemy because it is invisible and therefore never disappears. Having an enemy that poses a genuine and widely recognized threat can be very effective in holding the nation together. That is particularly useful when the prevailing ideology is based on the unabashed pursuit of self-interest. By declaring war on terrorism, President Bush gained the mandate he had previously lacked to pursue his goals. The Bush administration is deliberately fostering fear because it helps to keep the nation lined up behind the president. We have come a long way from Franklin Delano Roosevelt, who said that we have nothing to fear but fear itself.
But the war on terrorism—which is supposed to include the war on Iraq—cannot be accepted as the guiding principle of our foreign policy. What will happen to the world if the most powerful country on earth—the one that sets the agenda—is solely preoccupied with self-preservation? America must play a more constructive role if humanity is to make any progress.
Acting as the leader of a global open society will not protect the United States from terrorist attacks. But by playing a constructive role, we can regain the respect and support of the world, and this will make the task of fighting terrorism easier.
The Bush vision of American supremacy is not only unsound and unsustainable, it is also in contradiction with American values. We are an open society. The principles of open society are enshrined in the Declaration of Independence. And the institutions of our democracy are protected by our Constitution. The fact that we have a bunch of far-right ideologues in our executive branch does not turn us into a totalitarian dictatorship. There are checks and balances, and the president must obtain the support of the people. I put my faith in the people. But in the end, open society will not survive unless those who live in it believe in it.
George Soros is the founder and chairman of the Open Society Institute.
http://www.soros.org/resources/articles_publications/articles/americanprospect_20030527
The United States sold WMD to Iraq before the first invasion of Iraq and the Kuwaiti war. They have been trying to get them back ever since. There will be a limited nuclear weapon, sold by the US to some foreign government, that will come back to haunt the US soon enough! So much for protecting America and national security.
Sounds like Enron to me: Pray where is Ken Lay and why did he contribute to Bush?
HONG KONG CAPITALISM:
You have 2 cows. You sell 3 of them to your publicly listed company, using letters of credit opened by your brother-in-law at the bank, then you execute a debt/equity swap with an associated general offer so that you get all 4 cows back, with a tax deduction for keeping 5 cows. The milk rights are transferred via a Panamanian intermediary to a Cayman Islands company secretly owned by the majority shareholder who sells the rights to all 7 cows' milk back to the listed company. The annual report says that the company owns 8 cows, with an option to purchase one more. Meanwhile, you kill the 2 cows because the feng shui is bad.
The question is irrelevant to the issues at hand. I reside in this solar system on planet earth just like you, but I live in cyberspace on a part time basis. Your question is non sequitor. Don't ask don't tell! Americans are always asking the wrong stupid questions!
Bin Laden was financed by Bush cronies and Carlyle Group. Now that was stupidity.
Hitler was financed by British Bankers and New York Wall Street Firms. Now that was stupid.
America let the Japs bomb Pearl Harbor. It was a negligent military American industrial complex aching to get into WW II that sent agents over to Japan to hatch the plan in the first place. Now that was stupidity.
Saddam Insane did have WMD, the only problem with it was they were supplied to him by the United States Military to fight Iran, and as a backup in case Russia beat the Afghans, but they were all recovered before the invasion even started.
This would be a bigger black eye on the Bush White House PR machine if they told the truth. There were only two reasons to invade Iraq. To make sure we got all our own WMD back from that nation and to foreclose on over $200 billion in defaulted interest bearing debts. Giving Iraq the WMD in the first place, now that was stupid.
The United States currently has a budget deficit of over $1.7 trillion dollars when it comes to cleaning up its own stockpiles of WMD, chemical agents, toxic dumps, and over 50,000 metric tons of nuclear hazards. Now that is stupidity at work folks. Cleaning up the mess would create 3 million jobs for ten years.
So how stupid are Americans?
Really, really stupid!
Small hits are likely. If 200 deaths and 1500 maimed people can influence an election in Spain, it is likely to happen here and soon, before the election, but not too soon. Force always begets force, and Bush has stirred up a giant global hornets nest.
It is necessary to take Bush out of Office in order to stop what he begun even before he took office. Many lives depend on it and several foreign governments have endorsed Kerry regardless of his running mate.
Watch the dollar drop some more and the market drop every time Bush opens his mouth. It is not the voters that will oust him, it is the global market place voting with their money that will cause his demise. He will go down in infamy!
Here is what one person likes to say behind your back Due!
"I wasn't aware of that, but it could be true. But I am aware that DD does report what he considers to be suspicious activity to the SEC. And he could also be sendig on results of his research to StockPatrol, too. I am starting to think that some of the RB posters that do all the "uncovering" are getting paid by the SEC as informers. I don't think they are actually hired to do so. I think they probably may get some kind of finder's fee should the info they uncover and document result in the SEC filing charges.
From what I have gleaned, many appear to have gotten into it by playing the market with their own investments and are mainly earning livings by running their own businesses. Hence, they then have the time to devote to their internet "research" hobbies.
So your suspicions of "Witch Hunts" may very well have a basis in fact. I just do not think that the SEC or the FBI have active agents that they are paying to devote their time to message board posting. What appears to be going on is a whole lot of cyber folks performing their own private "witch hunting" and reporting their results to the agencies they have gained "contacts" within."
Your suspicious activity may be being reported to Interpol, don't leave home any time soon Due! And when you hear that Knock Knock!, don't ask who's there? It will be too late.
Prescription drug use in America has risen by over 200% in the last decade as drug companies continue to use Madison Avenue approaches to get stupid Americans to take them! Meanwhile, poppy seed production in Afghanistan has doubled since the US blew away the Taliban and the drug War Lords have taken over. Exports of pure grade heroin to the United States has risen by 25% since the beginning of the War in Iraq, and the prices of the drug on American city streets has dropped accordingly while the potency has risen dramatically. This is a direct effect of the Bush Doctrine!
I have a Sony Handycam. Anyone care to fill me in on how to use it for the benefit of others who cannot afford one?
American Stupidity Index Rising
According to recent polls, Americans who have IQ's less than 100 have risen by over 50% during the past four years.
If intelligence can be raised with the truth, then it can be lowered with falsities.
The amount of false information circulating in the United States on the subject of the economy, analyst opinions, and even judgements made by the courts has risen over 400% in the past year alone.
If enough fools follow one guru, they can manipulate the price of a stock to no end. Here is on example:
http://peterleeds.com/
http://peterleeds.com/tour.htm
Todays price:
http://finance.yahoo.com/q/bc?s=USNA&t=5y
32% of the float is now short!
http://finance.yahoo.com/q/ks?s=USNA
Hoover Dam has increased its security ten fold since 911 but it is highly vulnerable. They are spending a billion dollars to build a bypass route so people cannot drive over it and they will eventually limit public access to this wonder of human engineering. If that dam alone were to be blown up, at least 12% of the power grid in the Western US would be shut down for months. There is no back up power system to sustain such a heavy loss of electricity. The Hoover Dam is very vulnerable despite the increased check points in New Mexico and Nevada. The officials are not watching down below at night! There are hundreds of other dams around the nation that are likely targets, but it may not be the terrorists that launch such attacks, it may be the extreme far right supremacists themselves who follow a policy of chaos merchanting.
It is highly likely that the Bush administration and some CIA predecssors were involved in brainwashing Saudi terrorists into flying hijacked planes into the World Trade Center. It is called Psycho Politics, a subject invented by the secret KGB operatives in the 50's to which the CIA has subscribed ever since. Indications that the Mossad was also involved and tipped off two foreign governments prior to the event are also evidentiary.
Bush is going to stonewall the issue before the Commission, hoping to get relected. He will not win. I guarantee it!
Get ready for a deluge of lawsuits prior to April 1:
Majority Shareholder of Sports Resorts International, Inc. Files Law Suit
Against 'Short Sellers'
OWOSSO, Mich., Feb. 3 /PRNewswire/ -- Donald J. Williamson, the largest
shareholder of Sports Resorts International, Inc. (the "Company") (Nasdaq:
SPRI), today announced he has filed a lawsuit in the United States District
Court, State of Nevada, against various brokerage firms and market makers
alleging they have engaged in unlawful "naked short sales" of shares of SPRI
stock. The lawsuit alleges that "naked short sales" result in manipulation
of the market price of the publicly-traded shares of SPRI and present false
or misleading information concerning the price, actual trading activity
and/or the number of free-trading shares of SPRI in the trading market.
Among the parties named as defendants in the lawsuit are Goldman, Sachs &
Co.; Archipelago Holdings, LLC; Knight Securities, LP; M. H. Myerson & Co.,
Inc.; and Westminister Securities Corp.
A "short sale," which is legal, becomes "naked" and illegal when the seller
does not own or control and is unable to borrow sufficient shares to cover
the seller's "short" positions. This conduct has several very serious
negative results on a public company's stock:
* it allows a potentially unlimited number of shares to be sold, without
regard for the number of free-trading shares issued and outstanding;
* it destroys the integrity of the trading market;
* it artificially dilutes shareholder interests; and
* it devalues the value of the shares.
In addition to violations of the federal securities laws, the lawsuit also
alleges other claims based on civil fraud, racketeering and conspiracy, and
various claims based on state law, and seeks damages in excess of
$10,000,000 from each defendant.
Currently, the Company -- through its subsidiaries -- is engaged in the
manufacture and sale of bedliners and other truck accessories, and the
ownership and operation of a multi-purpose motor sports facility located
near Brainerd, Minn.
Certain statements included in this press release are "forward-looking"
statements, such as those relating to anticipated events or activities. The
Company's performance and financial results could differ materially from
those reflected in the forward-looking statements due to financial,
economic, regulatory and political factors as described in the Company's
filings with the Securities and Exchange Commission. Therefore, current or
prospective investors are cautioned not to place undue reliance on any such
forward- looking statements. The Company does not undertake any obligation
to publicly update or revise any forward-looking statements, whether as a
result of new information or future events.
For further information contact Investor Relations or Donald J. Williamson,
Chief Executive Officer, at 989-725-8354 or visit the Web site at:
http://www.sportsresortsinternational.com .
SOURCE Sports Resorts International, Inc.
/CONTACT: Donald J. Williamson of Sports Resorts International, Inc.,
+1-989-725-8354/
Please remember that we are not responsible for any messages posted. We do not vouch for or warrant the accuracy, completeness or usefulness of any message, and are not responsible for the contents of any message. The messages express the views of the author of the message, not necessarily the views of this BB. Any user who feels that a posted message is objectionable is encouraged to contact us immediately by email. We have the ability to remove objectionable messages and we will make every effort to do so, within a reasonable time frame, if we determine that removal is necessary. You agree, through your use of this service, that you will not use this BB to post any material which is knowingly false and/or defamatory, inaccurate, abusive, vulgar, hateful, harassing, obscene, profane, sexually oriented, threatening, invasive of a person's privacy, or otherwise violative of any law. You agree not to post any copyrighted material unless the copyright is owned by you or by this BB.
http://mystockforum.com/index.php?
Percentage of Stupid Americans:
The polls show that 46% of Americans are stupid! Stupidity is defined as not knowing something when it is obviously right in front of your faces.
Only an idiot would pay to join this site:
http://mystockforum.com/join.htm
I am from another planet. Alien! I predict that your entire economy and political structure is about to collapse. The writing is on the moon and the stars are gunning for you and your brethren. George Bush is the Anti-Christ! He is a bare faced messiah! False Prophit!
35% of the price of gas in California is for various federal and state taxes.
This writer predicts another major terrorist attack against the US on US soil just prior to the elections that will topple Bush administration. Homeland Security is not all that it is being hyped to be, despite the increased billions in expenditures. Many security flaws exist by simple observation. Buses, railways, stadiums, high schools, public libraries, even college campuses lack tremendous security.
During a recent lecture given by George Soros at the University of Berkley SC near Oakland, two people in the audience stood up to heckle Mr. Soros and the event was immediately shut down. Ruined for the rest of the 2,000 people in attendance. Surprisingly, there were no armed guards surrounding the billionaire, nor were there any metal detectors used on the attendees prior to attending the auditorium. Students were allowed to attend free of charge.
How many foriegn terrorists have infiltrated our national college campuses?
Highest price paid for a gallon of gas this past week by this writer: $2.45 in the boonies of California.
MyStockForum.Com The Worlds' #1 Microcap Hot Stock Picks Service Announces Super Picks for 2004
MyStockForum.Com announces the following Hot Stock Super Picks as the Super Picks for 2004 as being the greatest undervalued stocks with huge potential.
(PRWEB) March 12, 2004 -- MyStockForum.Com announces the following Hot Stock Super Picks as the Super Picks for 2004 as being the greatest undervalued stocks with huge potential.
1. Rush Financial Technologies, Inc, RushTrade.Com (OTC BB:RSHF.OB ) is an undiscovered gem. RushTrade offers a superior service far better than eTrade or Ameritrade and their pro software is simply addictive. Once they launch their marketing campaign and stock traders find out about their service they will find RushTrade.Com to be an investors' dream come true. MyStockForum.Com Hot Stock Pick target price is $15.00 in less than 5 years. This is also a perfect buyout candidate for Yahoo! or LookSmart.
This firm was looking for about $2 million in a capital raise about two years ago. Wonder if they ever raised the money?
2. GlobeTel Communications Corp (OTC BB:GTEL.OB ) - GTEL Expects to offer the new IP phone service to the general public after March 15th. This company is a serious contender with regular phone services and having installed a world wide infrastructure it signals they are here to stay. Utilizing state-of-the-art VoIP technology, GlobeTel is establishing itself as a full service international telecommunications company offering a full array of communications services in the world markets. GlobeTel’s core business development focus is on those emerging markets that have the potential to provide high growth and margins. GlobeTel offers to its customers a full portfolio of telecommunications services including: international voice, Data service, International Prepaid calling services, enhanced service platform, international subscription programs for international calling.
MyStockForum.Com Hot Stock Pick target price $5.00 in 5 years or less.
Rather ambitious price projections I would opine.
3. Bentley Commerce Corporation (OTCBB: BLYC), the emerging leader in online barter and trade, is establishing a global trade marketplace through a seamlessly integrated family of online barter services. Bentley’s vision is to create an alliance of trade exchanges, enterprise exchanges and corporate barter companies throughout the world" MyStockForum.Com Hot Stock Pick target price $7.00 -$10.00 in 5 years or less.
Been following this one for a year. Don't see how they can hit those price targets without consolidating with another barter exchange that is making money.
4. Advanced Optics Electronics Inc. (OTC BB: ADOT) is a company developing a flat screen replacement for all those billboards on the highways and in the cities. In other words they aim to change the face of advertising forever. Their inexpensive products due to be released later this year will be impressive, inexpensive and practical. This company is poised to become THE world leader in this field having developed their own patented technology they stand out from the rest. No more dull and outdated billboard ads. With their billboards, there is opportunity to run unlimited ads rather than the current billboard that has just one ad.
MyStockForum.Com Hot Stock Pick target price is $8.00 in less than 5 years.
A highly unlikely price target based on their current financials which can be found here. /b/]:
http://finance.yahoo.com/q/bs?s=ADOT.OB&annual
5. The World Golf League, Inc. (OTC BB:WGFL.OB) is something that should have been created long time ago. Now that it is here we have a company with a huge future outlook and is expected to produce over 20,000 new members through 1st quarter 2004 and just under $3 million in revenue. .``With The Golf channel reaching 60 million households and Direct TV's 2.2 million sports subscribers, the reach and frequency of this campaign will have a tremendous impact on our objectives of reaching our membership goals,'' said Mike Pagnano, CEO
MyStockForum.Com Hot Stock Pick target price $10 - $20 in 7 years or less.
Another highly unlikely price target according to their financials.
6. Ambient Corporation (OTCBB:ABTG) A leader in Power Line Communications (PLC) technology, 1) PLC is the cheapest and most promising network system 2) ABTG: key technique and national wide License holder 3) Not just the lowest price in this sector but the best technology to make this possible and to top it off EarthLink is on board with this company so the future looks bright. MyStockForum.Com Hot Stock Pick target price $20.00 in 5 years or less.
7. MobilePro Corp. (OTCBB: MOBL) is a wireless technology and broadband Internet services company which has recently announced that the company has successfully completed the first stage of testing of the low noise amplifier (LNA) design of its ZigBee chip. This puts the company in a whole new playing field. MyStockForum.Com Hot Stock Pick target price $3.00 - $7.00 in 5 years or less.
8. BSI2000, Inc. (OTCBB: BSIO) has a revolutionary and practical technology for National and Global identification cards which already has the interest of many governments world wide especially Europe and the Middle East. MyStockForum.Com Hot Stock Pick target price $5.00 - $7.50 in 5 years or less.
9. AuGRID Corporation's (OTCBB:AGRD) has a new and impressive body armor. It has already received great interest from US Police Departments and Armed services and has a global market. MyStockForum.Com Hot Stock Pick target price $5.00 - $7.50 in 5 years or less.
10. Stonepath Group (AMEX: STG) Reported for 2003 revenues of $220.3 million, up from $122.8 million for the same prior year period, an increase of $97.5 million. Needless to say this company is on the right track with a solid future ahead. MyStockForum.Com Hot Stock Pick target price $7.50 in 1 year or less.
11. Universal Communication Systems, Inc. (OTCBB: UCSY) is another company with a very powerful technology. The State of Israel is already interested in their technology. This is a company poised to become a world leader in solving water crisis world wide. MyStockForum.Com Hot Stock Pick target price $10 in 5 years or less.
12. Lucent Technologies (NYSE: LU) is heavily undervalued. This stock should be trading between $40 - $60. We expect Lucent Technologies to recover soon and we have reason to believe Cisco Systems, Inc. will either merge with LU or they will buy LU outright. It would be the perfect merger and the global economy will benefit from it beyond measure. Nevertheless, this stock is undervalued big time.
13. LookSmart (Nasdaq: LOOK, ASX: LOK), a leader in search, which in our opinion is on par with Yahoo! is undervalued and should be trading on par or close to Yahoo! LookSmart service is superior to Yahoo! in some ways in our opinion. MyStockForum.Com Hot Stock Pick target price $8.00 in 5 years or less.
14. WorldWater Corp. (OTC BB:WWAT) is an international solar engineering and water management company with unique, high-powered solar technology providing solutions to water supply and energy problems. This company has developed a very practical and efficient system which is already selling. The Middle East, Africa and the US Agriculture industries are already showing interest in their product and is already selling. This is a company with a bright future. MyStockForum.Com Hot Stock Pick target price $10 - $20 in 10 years or less
15. Triangle Multi-Media (OTC: QBID) - Triangle Multi- Media Ltd. is a once in a lifetime opportunity.
Triangle Multi-Media, Inc. operates the Triangle Television Network (TTN). TTN is a distributor of unique and compelling quality programming focused on alternative lifestyles. With an estimated 20 million gay and lesbian people in the US, the market is large and attractive. Disposable spending for this group exceeds $500 billion, advertisers have taken note, making it the fastest growing advertising segment in the US.
To find out more about the #1 stock picking site and see my proven track record click on www.mystockforum.com
Safe Harbor Disclosure:
Any and all MyStockForum.Com stock profiles contain or incorporate by reference "forward-looking statements," including certain information with respect to plans and strategies of the featured company. As such, any statements contained therein or incorporated therein by reference that are not statements of historical fact may be deemed to be forward-looking statements. Without limiting the foregoing, the words "believe(s)," "anticipate(s)," "plan(s)," "expect(s)," "project(s)" "anticipate(s)" and similar expressions are intended to identify forward-looking statements. There are a number of important factors that could cause actual events or actual results of the Companies profiled herein to differ materially from these indicated by such forward-looking statements.
I don't have time to research all these companies right now but will look at the rest of them later.Thanks for the post.
Raging Bull Holdings Announces Filing of a Class Action Lawsuit Against Ameritrade Holdings, Knight Trading Group and 6 Key Individuals -- AMTD, NITE
WAYNESVILLE, N.C., Oct. 23, 2003 (PRIMEZONE) -- Raging Bull Holdings et al -- (a consortium of private investors) on behalf of themselves and others similarly situated, announced today that a class action lawsuit was filed on October 10, 2003 in the United States District Court for the District of Nebraska, case number 8:03CV421, on behalf of customers of Ameritrade Holdings Inc. (Nasdaq:AMTD) et al ("Ameritrade") who became customers of Ameritrade between March 29, 1995 and September 30, 2003, inclusive the ("Class Period"). The lawsuit additionally names Knight Trading Group Inc ("Knight") (Nasdaq:NITE), J. Joe Ricketts, Gene L. Finn, Kenneth D. Pasternak, Steven L. Steinman, Walter F. Raquet and Robert M. Lazarowitz as defendants.
The complaint charges Ameritrade, Knight and certain key officers and directors with mutiple violations of SEC Rules 3b, 10b and 11Ac. Ameritrade violated Rule 11Ac in that they failed to disclose to their customers their true affiliation with Knight, the true level of customer order flow routed to Knight for execution and the true payments for order flow received from Knight. Knight violated Rules 11Ac regarding order handling and display in connection with the orders placed via Ameritrade's customers. Both companies filed false historical data in required SEC filings and reports. All defendants violated Rules 10b and 3a in a scheme to defraud Ameritrade's customers through improper order execution by not properly revealing the true affiliation shared between the parties as complained of in this action.
Plaintiffs allege that approximately 70 percent of all customers' orders were routed to Knight for execution during the 8 1/2 year Class Period. This resulted in improper order handling and execution of nearly 40,000 trades per day on all securities on all major exchanges. The amount defrauded of the 3 million plus Class members in this action resulted in losses of billions of dollars of investment capital. The lawsuit seeks $4.5 billion in restitution, or $1500 per member.
Ameritrade failed their fiduciary responsibility to disclose the affiliation shared with Knight to their customers, the regulatory agencies and the investing public. Ameritrade's ownership position of Knight common stock, revenues received for payment for order flow and past equity income gains from Roundtable Partners LLC obligates Ameritrade to properly disclose all levels of this affiliation to the public. By not disclosing this affiliation, and Knight's willful violations of SEC Rules, as sanctioned by the SEC and the NASD, the Class Members have sustained the damages complained of herein.
If you became a customer of Ameritrade between March 29, 1995 and September 30, 2003, and were victim to your orders placed via Ameritrade and Knight not receiving the execution deserved, and sustained financial losses thereby, and wish to serve as lead plaintiff in this action, you must move the Court no later than December 29, 2003.
If you are of counsel, with a leading law firm, experienced in prosecuting complex cases involving brokerage and market maker firm fraud, breach of fiduciary duty and SEC and NASD Rules violations, and wish to represent this Class in this action, you may contact the filer of this complaint as per below.
Direct all inquiries regarding this matter to Denton L. Keener of Raging Bull Holdings by telephoning (828) 734-2097, via email to ragingbullinvgroup@charter.net, via regular mail to 177 Walnut Street Suite 9, Waynesville, NC 28786. A copy of this complaint is available from the Court or by contacting Raging Bull Holdings.
CONTACT: Raging Bull Holdings
Denton L. Keener
177 Walnut St. Suite 9
Waynesville, NC 28786
828-734-2097
ragingbullinvgroup@charter.net
The above appears to be rather dated.
USXP is still waiting to collect on over $200 million judgement. Once the money goes offshore it is very difficult to recover. Some companies are considering cancelling stock certificates held by foreign naked shorters under convertible debentures by April 1, 2004, resulting in double jeopardy for the likes of NITE and AMTD and their naked partners. Its time to see all the emperors with no clothes.
How stupid are Americans anyway?
They put their own hard earned money in a bank that loans it back to them at interest and they then let some government controlled monopolies called banks and Government Sponsored Enterprises ruin their lives with inflation, high energy costs, higher and higher housing costs until the whole shameful thing collapses, and they do absolutely nothing about it till its too late. And then they blame their own government for something they should have revolted about decades ago!
I swear to god that the homeless and disgruntled students in this country are about to start throwing molotiv cocktails at every scamming slimy bank in this country before the next election starting with The Federal Reserve, Citigroup and Bank of America!
Hows that for a rant!