| | Register
Who is Bob O'Brien?
Sanity Check Archive
Click Here to see Bob's Old Sanity Check articles.
About our Blogs

Blogs found on this website represent the opinion of the author. For more information please visit our terms of use.
Funny Bunny
Looking for something a little lighter?
Catch Bob's more irreverent and amusing pieces in his Funny Bunny Blog.

Senate Hearing: Insider Trading Insidious and Pervasive.

Location: Blogs Bob O'Brien's Sanity Check Blog    
Posted by:   bobo 9/26/2006 6:38 AM

I listened with amusement as the Judiciary Committee met today to discuss insider trading.

Comments went from the ludicrously waffling bureaucratic shuffling, to the straightforward. Without belaboring the whole thing, suffice it to say that the closer you got to the folks who are supposed to be upholding the law, the further you got from anyone willing to describe the problem. There was lots of chitty chat about studying, and ascertaining, and monitoring, but nobody wanted to commit to anything more solid than Jello.

The academics, on the other hand, were quick to say, hell yes, it's a big problem - insidious and pervasive.

Now, if we go back 20 years, recall that Milken and Boesky and their network were engaging in huge, multi-faceted insider trading scams of breathtaking scope. Back then insider trading was pervasive. M&A activity was routinely frontrun by everyone on Wall Street with a brokerage account.

And yet our regulators sit in indecision over whether the lion's share of scumbags who were gaming the system then, and who run the system now, are still doing what they've been doing with impunity for 20 years or more.

Huh. That's a tough one. Hmmmmmm. Hmmmmmmmmmm.

I'll go with, they are?

Man oh man are we in trouble, if the regulators are so interested in CYA and protecting Wall Street that they can't even agree that the obvious is true.

------------------

Speaking of dishonest regulators, Dave Patch wrote a great piece on what lying scumbags the SEC are. Specifically how they have been issuing materially false and misleading information to investors as to how SHO is "working" - which I agree colors the quality of investing decisions.

If your regulator lies to you about whether it is safe to go out on the street after dark, and you discover to your dismay that its reports of how safe the neighborhood is are a sham, and you are attacked ten seconds after walking out your door...did that regulator's dishonesty impact your decision to go out? They told you crime had dropped significantly. It wasn't taking your life into your hands to walk the dog. They were doing a good job.

As you slip into unconsciousness, you see the bodies of your neighbors, also beaten and robbed, strewn about the streets.

So the question is, why is Congress letting the SEC lie to the public? Why is that acceptable? Why isn't there a special prosecutor, digging for the name of the individual who ordered the false and misleading data to be disseminated?

Senator Specter, how much more of this do we have to be subjected to?

----------------------

The NASD filed against a NV broker for allowing an unidentified party basically sell billions of shares of CMKX through their brokerage.

The charges were brought under the guise of money laundering, or more specifically in the guise of violating anti-money laundering rules.

This is of interest because CMKX has been doing a certificate pull for months now, and there are still thousands of shareholders who can't get certificates for the stock they bought and paid for.

So here's a question. What kind of locate or borrow did this unidentified bad guy have, and why didn't the system stop almost 37% of the company's OS from being sold by scumbags?

Never mind the money laundering. What about the core issue, which is bad guys selling almost 37% of the company's stock, unhindered by any concerns of ever delivering a single share?

Isn't it funny how our regulators are lying to us about the size of the problem, and even when these miscreants are caught and prosecuted, nobody ever really wants to discuss the real offense?

WTF is going on in our markets? And is this just a CYA move by the system, to have a scapegoat for all the undelivered shares of CMKX it is becoming obvious are out there? Give the brokers a chance to say, "Hey, this isn't our fault, it's probably that unidentified bad guy!"

Every day provides yet more ugliness.

----------------- 

Pegasus Wireless announced they are going to delist voluntarily. That on the surface seems like it would hurt those naked short selling the company.

Not so.

Even with a new CUSIP number, the brokers will just assign their fails the new CUSIP, and go on about their business. So it will accomplish nothing that I can tell.

They should have asked qualified folks about whether that course would be effective.

It won't be.
Copyright ©2006 Bob O'Brien
Permalink  |  Trackback
Comments (39)
Re: Senate Hearing: Insider Trading Insidious and Pervasive. By davidn on 9/26/2006 8:35 AM
Company voluntarily delists from the Nasdaq to fight share counterfeiting.

http://www.forbes.com/business/2006/09/25/pegasus-delists-naked-shorts-biz_cx_lm_0925pegasus.html

Unfortunately, they can't completely delist as the market makers can list them on the pinks or Berlin without their permission.

As long as they have 50 shareholders, they are a public company and should be regulated by the SEC even if they don't trade.

Who blatant does this have to get?
Re: Senate Hearing: Insider Trading Insidious and Pervasive. By davidn on 9/26/2006 8:43 AM
Liz, if you are reading this, thank you and Forbes and kudos for your courage.
Re: Senate Hearing: Insider Trading Insidious and Pervasive. By zippy on 9/27/2006 6:43 AM
Re CKCM, according to the NASD complaint, no borrow was necessary for the share sales, as they had physical certificates:


NASD OFFICE OF HEARING OFFICERS DEPARTMENT OF ENFORCEMENT,
Complainant,
v.
NEVWEST SECURITIES
CORPORATION,
(CRD No. 46464),
SERGEY RUMYANTSEV,
(CRD No. 4009791),
and
ANTONY M. SANTOS,
(CRD No. 3239243),
Respondents.
Disciplinary Proceeding
No. E0220040112-01

...27. Shortly after JE began opening accounts at NevWest, he developed a trading pattern of physically carrying into the firm, certificates of low-priced securities. In February 2003, JE began to deposit shares of CMKM into the various accounts he opened at NevWest. JE instructed NevWest, through his registered representative, to expeditiously liquidate the certificates, and to immediately wire all sales proceeds to various bank accounts….
32. In 2004, JE began to aggressively implement his trading strategy in CMKM shares. In many instances, JE carried into NevWest billions of CMKM shares at a time. Through NevWest, he liquidated billions of shares per month.
correction By zippy on 9/27/2006 6:45 AM
should read CMKX above, not CKCM
Re: Senate Hearing: Insider Trading Insidious and Pervasive. By clearthinker on 9/27/2006 7:07 AM
stock manipulation is a two edged sword....the" promote the float" crowd have been milking the American Investor for years, and while there have been many regulatory actions against those putting out false information, the number of "miscreants" simply outnumbers the "good guys". Shows like Mad Money help people feel that they are in control of an out of control situation, it is a grand illusion. Too many behind the scene forces are at work making huge amounts of money, while the public scavenges crumbs tossed to appease.

Now, the FTD problem....If after all of the recent events ( Refco, Aguirre, Gradient/Rocker v OSTK, with a Amicus brief filed by Calif AG, UBS in LA, Utah passing a state law, etc...) can't command immediate and decisive action from the Senate Judiciary....then we all have our answer about what is to be done.

These are critical days for this "movement".....
Roundtable Regulation SHO Pilot Recap: By newspaper on 9/27/2006 7:23 AM
The second panel was unanimous in its opposition to Regulation SHO. One panelist noted that the infamous "bear raid" scenario of depressing a stock through manipulative shorting, if indeed it exists at all, is much rarer than the opposite scenario of "pump and dump" (or manipulation of a stock price upwards, generally followed by insider selling) and said that short sellers were a natural ally of the SEC in deflating "pump and dumps." Another panelist noted that the tick test (the form of short sale price restriction in use on the NYSE, which forbids a short sale on a downtick in the price) may function as a short-acting circuit breaker by causing moderate congestion in markets. A third panelist observed that the focus of Regulation SHO was downward price manipulation, while no one was focusing on the upward price manipulation that may be caused by open collusion in withholding securities from the lending market.

Panelists spoke out against the locate rule (which requires brokers effecting short sales to follow procedures designed to ensure that they can locate securities to borrow and thus close the short sale), saying that the penalty for naked shorting was too draconian and should be replaced with a series of moderate penalties (perhaps 100-300 bps) aimed at creating a transparent market in securities lending with clear price information. Panelists also discussed the consequences of settlement failures and concerns regarding the effect on corporate governance of unclear share ownership.

At the close of the panel, it remained unclear whether or not the SEC will act on the unanimous recommendation of the economists who served on the panels to repeal the price test restrictions provided under Regulation SHO.

http://www.mondaq.com/article.asp?articleid=43020&searchresults=1
RE: ***IMPORTANT*** By Roundclock on 9/27/2006 7:35 AM
As a preamble, I'll admit that I don't precisely understand the mechanics of netting.

Notwithstanding, it would seem to me that a short sale is a sufficiently different category of sale such that it should not be directly netted against a buy in the same security for the purpose of establishing net trade positions.

Essentially a short sale is a bundle of an instruction and an obligation; that obligation being the obligation to have previously borrowed or located the share sold short. To ignore that this obligation is a component part of the trade is problematic. In a world of netted transaction instructions and positions, it magically obsolves/distances the net position holder from an ability to perform any form of compliance with respect to the borrow/locate obligation. The net position holder never sees the seller's borrow/locate obligation so he can't subsequently ensure that the trade (sale + obligation) was properly executed.

It would seem to me that a short sale would need to be bonafided/bonded prior to introduction into a netting scheme in order for things to work appropriately.
Re: Senate Hearing: Insider Trading Insidious and Pervasive. By cd on 9/27/2006 8:10 AM
but ZIPPY where did he get the certs and were they restricted ?? those might be two questions to ask yourself :):)
Re: Senate Hearing: Insider Trading Insidious and Pervasive. By chilli hot stuff on 9/27/2006 8:57 AM
A judge at the centre of a sex, drugs and blackmail trial made a fool of himself by falling for his cleaner, the Old Bailey was told today. The man, referred to as Judge I for legal reasons, started an affair with Brazilian Roselane Driza, 37, which his former lover Judge J tried to warn him about. David Markham, prosecuting, said that 60-year-old Judge I "has the passion a man many years his junior might be proud of and became, in his words, a complete and total puppy to the defendant".

http://www.thisislondon.co.uk/news/article-23368267-details/Judge+a+'total+puppy'+with+his+chilli+hot+stuff+lover/article.do
Re: Senate Hearing: Insider Trading Insidious and Pervasive. By cynabear on 9/27/2006 9:49 AM
Perhaps it is the FBI and not the SEC that will make the difference???
http://www.iht.com/articles/2006/09/26/business/fbi.php
thoughts???
Re: Senate Hearing: Insider Trading Insidious and Pervasive. By bobo on 9/27/2006 9:50 AM
Roundclock: Go back a few weeks and read my blog explaining how CNS netting works - they net any undelivered shares against the broker's shares held long, and an FTD isn't generated until those are exhausted.

The second level of pre-CNS netting presumably does some sort of buy-short netting, further skewing the numbers.
Re: Senate Hearing: Insider Trading Insidious and Pervasive. By InTheKnow on 9/27/2006 10:29 AM
Can any of those panelists point out one pump and dump that they know of that happen recently as opposed to any bear raids they know of recently?

They are all of of SHIT!
Re: Senate Hearing: Insider Trading Insidious and Pervasive. By the clueless sheeple... on 9/27/2006 11:46 AM
...tired of bending over

bobo.
many of us are really trying to keep up. but, as u know yourself know & THEY damn well know...so little time to squeeze in this important "education" & so much shitload of busy work we have to do to "make the rent". so sometimes we ask 4 shortcuts...

"Go back a few weeks and read my blog explaining how CNS netting works - they net any undelivered shares against the broker's shares held long, and an FTD isn't generated until those are exhausted"

these broker's shares held long... where do they get all this ownership?
they buy all these in the market...after collusding to depress prices?...
they own them all?
help us keep up...and
a heaping thank ya'll.
hell, i wish u ran the gdam country instead of those that are running it to the ground & lining their own pockets.
Re: Senate Hearing: Insider Trading Insidious and Pervasive. By bobo on 9/27/2006 12:36 PM
Imagine you are Schwab. You have 4 million shares of NFI held long on behalf of your customers. A hedge fund puts a 100K sell through you, and then fails to deliver. What the CNS system sees is 4 million minus the 100K = 3.9 million held long. Netting one against the other. No FTD is generated until the other 3.9 million shares are offest with sales, OR with delivery failures.

Starting to get a feel for how big this is?
Re: Senate Hearing: Insider Trading Insidious and Pervasive. By damn feel good on 9/28/2006 6:30 AM
to be a bankster!



thank you for your knowledgable reply.
hmmm. i'm trying to consider the implications of that. because of the enabling brokerages, there seems to be no difference between
- shortselling shares & accepting the risk of future price to pay for buy back promised &
- selling shares never owned with NO INTENT of fufilling the short contract to buy back shares by a certain date... because the enabling brokerages has misleadingly located my long shares to cover the hedges contract to buy in.
i'm not a lawyer but i dont think u.s legal contracts should involve nor obligate non-informed parties who never consented to this & may well be financially harmed by this. what right has schwab or any other to allocate my assets for others' trading strategies running possibly counter to my own. what kind of fiduciary duties are these investment houses providing for my retirment funds. why has gubmint allowed corporations to decimate guaranteed pensions & substitute 401k investments with these brokerages who are reallocating our recorded assets elsewhere.
if big finance can use other peoples money, why cant we all. i'll borrow some of the bank's earning to use as collateral on business i want to buy & later i'll give it back...after i make mucho profits from the business. interest free loans for everyone
where the hell is ERISA on this?
Re: Senate Hearing: Insider Trading Insidious and Pervasive. By clearthinker on 9/26/2006 9:33 AM
if it hasn't become obvious that no one is going to do a thing to clean this up...it is now....After all, Specter and Hatch are politicians....it's likely they will let it go, even at the risk of some kind of systemic disaster...that is the way our politicians are.....they wil jump up and down howling to the moon about HP, and ignore Aguirree.....

Get some land in the country, and learn how to grow food.....it has gotten that bad...

out...
Re: Senate Hearing: Insider Trading Insidious and Pervasive. By Flyingfido on 9/26/2006 10:40 AM
I can tell you this: If NFI and FICC ever come anywhere near what I paid for the shares, I will sell out ant totally get out of the stock market for ever and ever, never to invest another penny, due to the refusal of the SEC to do ANYTHING POSITIVE about the situation at hand; namely allowing this NSS to continue on as though nothing is wrong with the system. Stock manipulation is not my cup of tea and I'm tired of being robbed.
M Fool Seth Jayson making fun of Liz Moyer. By newspaper on 9/26/2006 11:05 AM
M Fool Seth Jayson making fun of Liz Moyer.

http://www.fool.com/news/commentary/2006/commentary06092616.htm?source=eptyholnk303100&logvisit=y&npu=y
Re: Senate Hearing: Insider Trading Insidious and Pervasive. By tommytoyz on 9/26/2006 11:57 AM
It will at least stop anyone's ability from continuing to naked short sell and also hinder them from covering their FTDs and to lock them into their trade. The damage is done, but this way it gives the company time to figure out what to do and gather evidence.

While not a good tactic for most companies, maybe this tactic will work in the long run and for those who have already been taken down. Who knows.
Re: Senate Hearing: Insider Trading Insidious and Pervasive. By bobo on 9/26/2006 12:23 PM
Seth Jason - full of body slams about how crappy Pegasus is, however short on any actual substance in terms of the technology or product. Lots of sniping at the management, along with stuff that the shorts easily could have written and fed him - as with many of his other fine bits of work. What a surprise.

As to their move, the brokers will just ledger over the FTDs from the current CUSIP to the next. They own the system, and nobody will stop them, so why not? Why wouldn't they?

On the CMKX front, the broker that is being hit by the NASD is likely the smallest player in that game. I happen to know there are lots of other larger houses that the NASD could have gone after, but they picked on the smallest.

Who wants a well-funded fight against an able adversary? Better to slam the littlest guy then hit one of the powerhouses in the face with a stick.
They can do and get away with anything that they want. By newspaper on 9/26/2006 12:33 PM
I hope you are happy. Now that you opened my eyes to this I can’t sleep at night. I am obsessed trying to find more information about all of this and depressed when I start to understand that all of our worst fears are confirmed.

How are we ever going to be able to win this?
Re: Senate Hearing: Insider Trading Insidious and Pervasive. By J on 9/26/2006 12:33 PM


All eyes on CMKX now... gonna be a fun ride from here on out! JMO ;)

Thanks for all you do bobo.
Re: Senate Hearing: Insider Trading Insidious and Pervasive. By virakiller on 9/26/2006 1:10 PM
hey newspaper "how we ever gonna win this ?"

I ask myself that every day and the only answer I get is public execution on Wall Street
If we the people grab that Anti American terrorist John Mack and string him up and hang him on Wall Street with all to see we may finally get the markets settled

BELIEVE ME that day is fast approaching

America are we going to allow ourselves and our country to be bankrupted by
these traitors ?

Lets all meet on Wall Street with ropes and baseball bats

JUDGEMENT DAY is fast approaching
Re: Senate Hearing: Insider Trading Insidious and Pervasive. By MarionPolk on 9/26/2006 1:15 PM
The only thing the "delisting" of PGWC will accomplish is the termination of options trading.

The existence of options allows "legal" naked shorting.

With the "option market maker exemption" gone, all PGWC will have to worry about is "illegal" naked shorting.
Re: Senate Hearing: Insider Trading Insidious and Pervasive. By newspaper on 9/26/2006 1:17 PM
Know what really gets to me? I know that we are being robbed by Wall Street that I know and understand. But it’s the contempt they show for us. The media belittles us and makes us out to be fanatical and greedy.

They don’t even try to hide what they are doing. They do it in broad daylight and they avoid all facts in all cases. Because if began to talk about even one fact the whole fabric they have created will start to become undone.

So we ask them look at the fails: they tell us- shorts are heroes
We show them – look at all of these brokerage houses that just got fined for selling shares they could not locate: they tell us- shorts are heroes
We tell them – look we have all of these lists and hard facts FOIA data and it shows there are more shares short than the available float that should be imposable: they tell us- shorts are heroes

We confront them with facts and the standard SEC DTCC NY MEDIA party line from Herb Greenberg and others like him is “I don’t care about the facts. I don’t care about the fails they are uninteresting. Short sellers are heroes and if they attack a company they are just protecting us from the all evil pump and dump. “

“Shorts only attack bad pump and dump companies. If they attack a company it deserved to be attacked and it was overvalued anyway, and by the way there is no such thing as a short and distort.”

I have never seen anything like this before in my life.
Re: Senate Hearing: Insider Trading Insidious and Pervasive. By ChumBucket on 9/26/2006 3:00 PM
NASD OFFICE OF HEARING OFFICERS DEPARTMENT OF ENFORCEMENT,
Complainant,
v.
NEVWEST SECURITIES
CORPORATION,
(CRD No. 46464),
SERGEY RUMYANTSEV,
(CRD No. 4009791),
and
ANTONY M. SANTOS,
(CRD No. 3239243)


BOBO: This is bobo. Please post a link, not a 6000 word filing. It eats up too much bandwidth and clogs the blog. Thanks.
Re: Senate Hearing: Insider Trading Insidious and Pervasive. By bobo on 9/26/2006 3:07 PM
Newspaper: It occurs to me that this may be how business is conducted and has been conducted for many, many years, in politics, on Wall Street, in national policy.

The Internet has just made it very simple to connect all the dots.

Recall in the 60's when an entire generation became enraged over the lies surrounding Vietnam, and then later, Watergate.

What if you are just now finding out that we have been lied to about almost everything that counts, for decades? At present, it's hard for me to believe that this is isolated. The exact same pattern of obfuscation took place in the S&L scandal - for years. And the administration, at the highest levels, helped in the cover-up. Anyone sounding the alarm was lambasted in the press for years. Greenspan is on record for defending the worst of the worst crooks in that affair, and he went on to become the Fed Chairman.

I think that you are just now starting to get it. Took me a while. But I think I completely understand just how bad this is. It is the entire market system, most of the financial press, most politicians, our banking industry, and likely the entire system of government regardless of political affinity.

What if?
Re: Senate Hearing: Insider Trading Insidious and Pervasive. By InTheKnow on 9/26/2006 3:48 PM
When the people in government, who can do something about this Ponzi Scheme, act dumb or confused or apprehensive and let this scheme rob fathers , mothers and their childrens futures from them it is about time that an outcry be hear that is so loud that it will deafen the schemers and rally the public behind our efforts.
Re: Senate Hearing: Insider Trading Insidious and Pervasive. By Goofy on 9/26/2006 4:29 PM
If I were in charge of a company, not a single person would be allowed to have personal information on a computer hard drive. It would all be on a server and you would have to get through 10 firewalls, jump through three hoops backwards and a long password to get access. But I am just goofy.


BOSTON, Sept 26 (Reuters) - General Electric Co. (GE.N: Quote, Profile, Research) said on Tuesday that a company laptop containing the names and Social Security numbers of 50,000 current and former employees was stolen in early September.
The laptop, issued to a GE official who was authorized to have the data, was stolen from a locked hotel room, the company said.
The Connecticut-based company began mailing letters earlier this week to the people whose names and Social Security numbers were on the laptop to notify them of the breach and to offer a year's free access to a credit-monitoring service, GE spokesman Russell Wilkerson said.
Wilkerson declined to give further details such as where and when the theft took place or whether the company official was still with General Electric.


http://today.reuters.com/news/articleinvesting.aspx?view=CN&symbol=GE&storyID=250777+26-Sep-2006+RTRS;&type=qcna
Re: Senate Hearing: Insider Trading Insidious and Pervasive. By Paladin on 9/26/2006 4:29 PM

<<< Washington, D.C. — NASD announced today that it has charged NevWest Securities Corporation of Las Vegas and two of its top officers - President Sergey Rumyantsev and Vice President Antony M. Santos - with violating NASD's Anti-Money Laundering Rule. >>>

Already sounds like Russian Mafia and Colombian drug lord joined at the hip.

*****************************
Re: Senate Hearing: Insider Trading Insidious and Pervasive. By kevin on 9/26/2006 5:08 PM
http://rense.com/general73/propp.htm
Re: Senate Hearing: Insider Trading Insidious and Pervasive. By Sound on 9/26/2006 6:24 PM
bobo,

After watching loosechange911 nothing would suprise me anymore. You know that SEC had offices in WTC7. I bet somebody wishes that the naked short problem could be hid under a pile of rubble?

SEC & EEOC:
Attack Delays Investigations

By Margaret Cronin Fisk
National Law Journal
September 17, 2001

Additional details emerged Friday about the effect of the collapse of 7 World Trade Center on investigations being conducted by the New York offices of the Securities and Exchange Commission and the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission, both of which were housed in the building.

The SEC has not quantified the number of active cases in which substantial files were destroyed. Reuters news service and the Los Angeles Times published reports estimating them at 3,000 to 4,000. They include the agency's major inquiry into the manner in which investment banks divvied up hot shares of initial public offerings during the high-tech boom.
Re: Senate Hearing: Insider Trading Insidious and Pervasive. By AlexZ on 9/26/2006 7:51 PM
It's very fortunate for Wall Street that all the records that could have cost them many billions in fines and lawsuits were destroyed in one of the only three steel frame building collapses into their own footprints in history, and of course coincidental that all three were WTC buildings, one of which a plane never hit, and which fires inadequate to melt steel or cause a collapse supposedly caused to drop like a rock in 6.5 seconds.

I like these urls: http://www.wtc7.net/
http://www.welfarestate.com/911/
http://deseretnews.com/dn/view/1%2C1249%2C635160132%2C00.html
And of course its also just a coincidence how many of the terrorist hijackers turned out to be alive and well years later, confused at how they were linked to the attack.

Sorry to "hijack" your blog. Most people don't want to know how bad this is.
*** Important *** By davidn on 9/26/2006 8:23 PM
Why hasn't the media covered this link on a new NSCC proposal?

The names on this list are the who's who of the problem market makers who constantly have stock for sale no matter the upward pressure.

http://www.globalcustody.net/default/securities_industry_news_latest_3/

I think this one could be important. The DTCC is arguing on our side for a change, albeit only because they want commissions.

There is x-clearing and there is CNS, but did you know there is also PRE-NETTING?

90% of brokerages use a third party to clear their trades. These tier two clearing organizations PRE-NET before entering the CNS system.

Historically: Refco, Adler Coleman, MJK Clearing - the big fail to delivers were hidden in this second tier. From the SEC and DTCC's point of view, they would have no idea how many shares these clearing organizations were supposed to have. They only know what they actually have.
Re: Senate Hearing: Insider Trading Insidious and Pervasive. By davidn on 9/26/2006 8:30 PM
Alex, I don't want to take the thread off topic either, but point 4 links building 7's collapse to naked shorting.

http://s15.invisionfree.com/Loose_Change_Forum/ar/t5586.htm
Welcome to the 21st Century - No Need for Market Makers By Craig on 9/26/2006 8:55 PM
With the advent of home computers - there is no need for Market Makers in equities and options with all their naked shorting exceptions. Before the rampant use of home computers, there was a need for market makers - it just wasn't possible to have a neat and orderley market. The SEC should phase in, starting with the most heavily traded stocks, markets without market makers.
Re: Senate Hearing: Insider Trading Insidious and Pervasive. By iscore4evr on 9/26/2006 9:55 PM
BOBO and Alex

Even more bad news. When you start linking and connecting all the dots, one of the authors of that incredible document called 'Project for the New American Century,' was former deputy Secretary of Defense Paul Wolfowitz. This guy is associated with such groups as the Bilderbergs, Council on Foreign Relations, The Trilateral Commission, and several other ominous charters. He was recently appointed by President Bush and is now the President of the World Bank.

I used to be a good little conservative who believed in the President, our Country, the Justice System, Wall Street as a means for us to get ahead, and lots of other illusions. Once I finally opened my eyes and traveled down the road of what happened on 9/11 with the World Trade Center, the US financial system, The Federal Reserve, the Bilderbergs, and others I am now scared to death. This all goes way deeper than just the Wall Street crooks. I used to view people like myself as having 'tin hats' . I wonder now if I would have been better off just never knowing what is really happening and having a smile on my face instead of living in fear of what is soon in store for my family and the rest of our society.
Re: Senate Hearing: Insider Trading Insidious and Pervasive. By piddly_sum on 9/27/2006 5:46 AM
Does anybody know the typical SEC turnaround time from the end of the comments period to action?

I know last time they put together a comprehensive summary report which tallied the comments. This time should't take too long, votes for: 300, miscreant votes against: 3.

As far as I am concerned, the SEC should immediately (i.e. today, why wait one more day?) implement their own proposed rule changes, regardless of potential other modifications which may/should take place as well. But it won't.
Re: Senate Hearing: Insider Trading Insidious and Pervasive. By bbhindyou on 9/27/2006 6:20 AM
The information sharing that is taking place here is the biggest threat the manipulators of wealth have had in centuries.
People who are used to unlimited power don't like ANYTHING they can't control.
The ability of the people who participate in this forum to take this information and communicate it to the masses must anger them.
I don't think the ability to communicate this way will be allowed much longer.
Its just too dangerous to them .
The biggest threat to the manipulators of the worlds power have always been a educated population with enough leisure time to think about things.
The best population for the powerhungry to rule are the hungry,tired,uneducated,devout[to any religion],POOR people.
People who are happy to work for any wages at any job just to be able to eat.
The information age does not meet the needs of the powerful.
What do you think will happen?
I don't know what will happen but something WILL.
Yes iscore be afraid for your family .
As we stand up we will be cut down.
Look how cut up Patric Byrne and his company have become.
I would rather die the death of honor of standing up to be cut down than the death of being ground under a masters heel as we crawl and beg.
Let us all stand afraid yet with honor.

Your name:
Title:
Comment:
Please limit your comments to 500 characters. For longer comments, use our forums.
Subscribe via Email
Get This Blog via Email:


Powered by Squeet.com
Sanity Check Archive