Funny Bunny
Looking for something a little lighter?
Catch Bob's more irreverent and amusing pieces in his Funny Bunny Blog.

"...Respectfully, What Part Of Illegal Is So Confusing?"

Location: Blogs Bob O'Brien's Sanity Check Blog    
Posted by:   bobo 2/13/2007 11:02 AM

I'm absolutely buried in several projects at present, hence my lack of blogging time, however I wanted to memorialize a remarkable exchange between Dr. Byrne, CEO of Overstock.com, and a reporter who seems very, very confused over some pretty fundamental things.

I could editorialize about this, and spend 2000 words in support of his position, however there's really no need. It stands on its own.

I will say this, however, before I provide the link - there is a remarkable tendency with some members of the press to frame their interview questions in such a way as to appear to be merely building a case for an agenda rather than seeking the truth.

This following is posted at the Overstock forum discussion board, and is Patrick's unedited exchange with a reporter from Bloomberg, who, from all appearances, is out to frame Overstock as embarking on an ill-advised, mercurial campaign to silence critics and persecute innocents. Why this reporter would do so, when the practice that Byrne has continually protested against is criminal stock manipulation involving the creation of millions of shares of counterfeit stock, is unknown. Why the blinders would be on to the idea that large money is doing ugly bad things in the markets is also unknown - it is not exactly a novel concept.

But read the exchange for yourself, and draw your own conclusions.

Oh, and I have started moderating the comments again because a crew of bashers and berserkers have been active in attempting to disrupt the forum, and I don't have time to check in 20 times a day to delete their insulting and vacuous posts. They seem annoyed by this censorship, in much the same way that gang members are annoyed at being restricted from tagging their turf with graffiti. Comments include those from Tony R, who still waffles between insisting that I am James Dale Davidson, to 'lilGW's sock puppets reveling in the manipulation of NFI and the presumed losses I've suffered. I have decided that we require these pearls for our edification as much as Beethoven's Fifth requires a kazoo solo, thus have spared you the full brunt. That they continue to work the boards should speak volumes, though.

Amazing.

Copyright ©2007 Bob O'Brien
Permalink  |  Trackback
Comments (12)
Re: "...Respectfully, What Part Of Illegal Is So Confusing?" By mhatmccane on 2/13/2007 11:29 AM
I am continually grateful that people as talented as you and Patrick take
the time and effort required to expose the theft on Wall Street
New Congress-New Optimism By robelita on 2/13/2007 1:00 PM
The mood in America is the status quo is no longer acceptable. This applies to the fight here against NSS. I congratulate Patrick and bobo for fighting the good fight with the intensity any good soldiers. We now have Democrats in charge of Congress and more importantly the congressional committees charged with oversight. Write Chris Dodd, head of the Senate Banking Committee, and tell him you DEMAND an investigation in the abuses of NSS. The time has never been better to open Pandora's Box-do it now!

P.S. bobo-I miss the cartoons

As ever, lurking in the background,

robelita

HASSENPFEFFER
The questions she forgot to ask By clearthinker on 2/13/2007 8:20 PM
And why were these questions NOT asked of Patrick...

"Why is it apparently impossible to settle the trades in your shares". ??
"Why do they alow OSTK to be on the reg SHO list for TWO YEARS"??

Pretty shocking that a so-called "journalist" overlooks the most obvious question in faovr of inunedo....

But unfortunately, not surprising
Re: "...Respectfully, What Part Of Illegal Is So Confusing?" By SteveM on 2/13/2007 4:13 PM
It's all on the record. Great exchange. Even without the linking of the "journalist" reviewing Gary's book, the tone and content of Susan Antilla's questions should be immediately flagged as being adversarial.

Why hasn't the DTCC responded to the allegations that they have a professional relationship with Gary Weiss?

Why hasn't the Department of Justice raided the SEC, DTC, and the DTCC? What the hell has happened to this country?

When this is all over, the "established news media" won't be able to rewrite history. The Internet has changed the rules. THIS TIME IT IS DIFFERENT!!!
Re: "...Respectfully, What Part Of Illegal Is So Confusing?" By Paladin on 2/13/2007 8:22 PM

From the iV msg. board comes this interesting truth seeking:

Inquiring minds actually inquire. What a valuable tool internet is as a starting point. Here is an interesting little journey, follow the thread:

link 1: http://query.nytimes.com/gst/fullpage.html?res=9A05E7DE133EF931A15755C0A961958260

excerpt: "Susan Antilla, a financial columnist for Bloomberg News and Bloomberg Television in New York, was married yesterday to Dennis H. Leibowitz, a senior vice president and securities analyst for the broadcasting, cable television and wireless industries at Donaldson, Lufkin & Jenrette, the New York investment bank."

link 2: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Donaldson,_Lufkin_&_Jenrette

excerpt: "In August of 2000, DLJ (which was majority owned by AXA Financial) was acquired by Credit Suisse"

link 3: http://biz.yahoo.com/ap/070202/overstock_com_lawsuit.html?.v=1

excerpt: "The lawsuit was filed against Morgan Stanley & Co., Goldman Sachs & Co., Bear Stearns Cos., Bank of America Securities LLC, Bank of New York, Citigroup Inc., Credit Suisse (USA) Inc., Deutsche Bank Securities Inc., Merrill Lynch, Pierce, Fenner & Smith Inc., UBS Financial Services Inc., and others."

Conclusion:
1. Is this what "connecting dots" is about?
2. Is there anything else but a conniving parasitic fauna in that a**hole of the world NYC seems to be?

http://www1.investorvillage.com/smbd.asp?mb=3532&mn=4804&pt=msg&mid=1431564

*********************
Re: "...Respectfully, What Part Of Illegal Is So Confusing?" By mhelburn on 2/13/2007 8:22 PM
I sent this to Lou Dobbs. Hope it isn't too off-topic.

Mainstream media is not telling America what is happening to their investments. Money is being syphoned off by criminals counterfeiting shares in the market. The SEC response to this was to grandfather the "fails to deliver" and give special privileges to a few to counterfeit shares. Wake up, America. The SEC is not your friend.
Re: "...Respectfully, What Part Of Illegal Is So Confusing?" By Greg Hogberg on 2/13/2007 8:23 PM
By: jcline
13 Feb 2007, 09:55 AM EST
Msg. 337553 of 337559
Jump to msg. #
Universal Express’ Response to First Call
NEW YORK--(BUSINESS WIRE)--Universal Express Inc. (OTCBB: USXP), today responded to First Call’s removal of a posted and announced recommendation and target price from its report on USXP.

“The depth of corruption insidious in this naked short selling scandal has just exposed itself once again. Are market makers, brokers or hedge funds short this stock in excess of 20 times its outstanding shares now afraid of free speech and free analyst opinions? Why a removal without an explanation? Damages and malfeasance towards our Company and its shareholders will always be defended by our Company,” stated Richard A. Altomare, President and CEO of Universal Express, Inc.

“The facts remain simple. An analyst report summary appears from First Call on its website. We verify and we announce. Then two days later the recommendation and target price mysteriously disappears from the report with the cryptic comment ‘No analyst consensus’,” continued Mr. Altomare.

“Who couldn’t afford or allow to have Universal Express’ future stock price evaluated and grow? Was it selected brokers, market makers and other Wall Street interests who wallow their gluttony through the naked shorting scandal at the expense of ordinary investors? Was it conflicted persons at a regulatory agency? Was it related to our long-term public position on the naked short selling scandal and against those responsible for naked short selling, being permitted in America to rob the middle class of the value of their investments while ruining thousands of public companies for more than ten years?” concluded Mr. Altomare.

“Universal Express will meet with its attorneys to commence appropriate litigation against First Call,” stated Chris G. Gunderson, General Counsel of Universal Express.

“There appears to have been a great wrong perpetrated against our Company ranging from the gross and reckless negligence of First Call to a possible deliberate attempt to harm our Company by insidious interests.”

“Universal Express has received more than $700 Million in jury awards against naked shorters and is not afraid to defend its rights and the interests of its shareholders. I am confident that our litigation against First Call and our ultimate success will right these wrongs with a judgment of appropriate valuation,” concluded Mr. Gunderson.

About Universal Express

Universal Express, Inc. is a 23 year old logistics and transportation conglomerate with multiple developing subsidiaries and services. For additional information please visit www.usxp.com

Safe Harbor Statement under the Private securities Litigation Reform Act of 1995: The statements contained herein, which are not historical, are forward-looking statements that are subject to risks and uncertainties that could cause actual results to differ materially from those expressed in the forward-looking statements including, but not limited to, certain delays beyond the Company's control with respect to market acceptance of new technologies, products and services, delays in testing and evaluation of products and services, and other risks detailed from time to time in the Company's filings with the Securities and Exchange Commission.

http://home.businesswire.com/portal/site/google/index.jsp?ndmViewId=news_view&newsId=20070212006
Re: "...Respectfully, What Part Of Illegal Is So Confusing?" By yes patrick-for the record on 2/13/2007 8:24 PM
on the record...this is 1 novastar investor that is totally grateful to both you, bunnyman and patrick byrne for such generous time & effort investigating the questionable financial transactions & trying to shine a lite on illegal short selling practices since the house is dark at the SEC. does anyone actually do some independent investigations over there. or is it all PR which seemed to be such a high investigative priority for the journalist from bloomberg. perhaps PR is now the only work of our federal agencies. government by PR...hmmm. how would that help to make an informed demcracy.
again, for the record i applaud patrick byrne. i would invest more $ in overstock shares but my funds had been depleted over time. i lost a large amount investiing in calpine energy who had its growth prospects ambushed by badly planned gubmint electricity policies. their comparativlly clean burning natural gas generators were taken down in PIPE death spirals & so was my $.


Re: "...Respectfully, What Part Of Illegal Is So Confusing?" By when goldman speaks... on 2/13/2007 8:25 PM
p.2 WSJ on monday 2/12...
a chilling article about G7 seeking to shed overlapping national regulations. seems there is too much of a "burden" for multinationals says Treas Secy paulson. his "aim is to break down artificial barriers" to reduce costs & "constraints on multinational companies. (so our nation's regulatory oversite on business practices are now artificial barriers?)
G7 officials want "free trade in securities based on mutual recognition of regulatory regimes."
seems to me those "artificial barriers" werent much of a barrier for those multinational to offshore their taxes due on profits to the taxing authority of their choosing.
the world according to Goldman Sachs. 1 thing Cramer is right about-
we are a nation of by & for the corporation. votes...schmotes.
Re: "...Respectfully, What Part Of Illegal Is So Confusing?" By alan degracia on 2/13/2007 8:28 PM
Patrick is a class act. EOM
Re: "...Respectfully, What Part Of Illegal Is So Confusing?" By rtway on 2/14/2007 11:34 AM
We have brought this up until we are blue in the face but maybe repetition will eventually bring results. This country is flawed by having two sets of laws and rules to govern our society. If I hold you up on the street with a gun and take your $1000 in cash than I am an armed robber with intent to steal your $1000. If I am a paid basher or journalist who has the intent of causing the value of a company to go down by using deceit or lies and you happen to own shares in that company and because of my ramblings of deceit and lies you sell your interest out of fear because of what I said or wrote and you loose $1000 the fact remains that you have had a $1000 illegally taken from you with intent. The only difference was you seen the first thief and the gun. In either example the intent was to take your money period and that is criminal and should be treated as such but that does not happen. In fact most people get bent out of shape when you call these bashers or journalist POS and what ever other name comes to mind. That $1000 might have destroyed that person and caused many other calamities from broken marriages to even death, yes some people have committed suicide. A thief is a thief and a pig painted yellow is still a pig. Screw the politically correct crap and start putting names and faces on these thieves and put them in jail.
I didn't know what fascism meant before watching this video By Ted on 2/14/2007 11:36 AM
http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-4312730277175242198&q=freedom+to+fascism&hl=en

http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-3254488777215293198&q=freedom+to+fascism&hl=en


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
Resources
Copyright © 2006 The Sanity Check   |  Privacy Statement  |  Terms Of Use