It's been a while since anyone has used this thread. While a lot has happened, its understandable that many people have been stunned by the recent developments.
In regard to your last response to me, let me first apologize for having confused you with your associate Mr. Reynoso. I expect that no harm was done since he is your associate editor and you share similar views. As far as your latest entry to this conversation, I think its best that Fenway responds if they feel the need. I would like to point out, however, that your thoughts and comments are not random but very deliberate and purposeful. I appreciate your admission that you have been in contact with the short sellers and bears. This point should be of interest to the VSE but I doubt that it will be much of a surprise or that it will bother them. I would like to respond your latest editorials in the Palawan Sun and its Web site. Since you claim to be concerned with honesty and consistency I find the June 9th Palawan editorial very puzzling.
I'm not surprised that you state in your editorial "something smells, and it stinks".
Usually when someone becomes aware of a bad odor, they check their breath, their shoes, or the nearest person to them. If they don't find the source this way, they than search in more remote places. The Palawan Sun has presented itself as the protector of Palawan's environment, local people, traditional burial sites, and guardian of the Philippine nation from dishonorable individuals of all nationalities. While denying any interest in the trading of Fenway Resources Stock, it was always surprised of any support for the project whether domestic, or on the Vancouver Stock Exchange. It has always acted as if any intelligent (honest) person would see that the project was doomed! Whether those prognostications adversely effected Fenway's stock or its perception by investors or its stock exchange was not important when compared to the noble ideals which the Palawan Sun expressed. BUT! Have you read the June article in the Palawan Sun by Mr. Reynoso?
It seems that Mr. Reynoso has "a lifetime fascination with concrete" and is "involved in cement daily."
He "has developed and produced.new cement products." He is a "private marine conservation policy adviser to both government and the private sector". He "always advocated concrete as road sealant much safer and superior to asphalt. It is has been long established that most of the siltation we find in our rivers and seas come from dirt roads and from the process itself of building roads.
In Palawan today as an example, the dirt road from Santa Lourdes Pantalan to Santa Cruz during summer may account for as much dust and siltation pollution as the cement factory that was (IS) proposed for Espanola. Our unpaved north roads probably pollute the rivers and seas more than twentyfold such a plant.
So that if one is to understand this writer's position on the long series of articles on cement which began in mid 1996, these two points should first be clear: Cement itself, and rigidly monitored cement factories are a wise trade off in the development-conservation equation as a rule; It was the fraud of the Palawan Council for Sustainable Development, with Fenway and their partners, that I opposed about the Fenway cement proposal for Palawan. NOTHING ELSE (my emphasis).
If you wish to reprint the whole article please do: I believe I extracted it fairly.
From his own words, he is active in cement, is in fact a producer of cement products, and an advisor to the private and governmental sectors. Since he advocates the use of cement to the government, his private sector cement manufacturers must be happy. How did they feel about a major competitor being established on Palawan? What advice could he offer them? Now that he believes Fenway is out, but that the project now makes such good sense, which friend, I mean client, would he advise that they complete the project? Does he blame the Palawan Council for Sustainable Development for seeing the fact that the "unpaved roads probably pollute the rivers and seas more than twentyfold " than the proposed plant? Should Fenway and its investors be penalized for investing the time and money in verifying the projects potential, seeking Philippine partners, producing an EIS, and finding financial backers outside of the Vancouver market? Obviously the "snubbed" Vancouver exchange and its brokerage houses which are caught short on the stock, and the Philippine cement producers who missed the opportunity themselves feel that Fenway had to be punished for their efforts.
If they all lacked the enthusiasm that Fenway has felt for the project, Mr. Reynoso should have expressed his true feelings about the project earlier!! Since he is your associate editor I assume you also felt the project would be beneficial environmentally. I assume you were making a political statement against the PCSD as well as Congressman Alfredo Abueg. I don't know the man, or your local politics, but if he felt that there was outside agitation of the local tribes to protest the project he couldn't mean you or Mister Reynoso. According to Mr. Reynoso, the local tribes had nothing to do with his protest!
It would seem that Mr. Reynoso could have written a very powerful EIS in favor of the project! I thrust the EIS Fenway has submitted to the PCSD is as strong, and that Fenway, unlike Mr. Reynoso, addressed all the concerns of the local tribes. Have you seen their EIS? Does it agree with Mr. Reynoso that the project will be a great environmental boon to Palawan and the Philippines? If as Mr. Reynoso states beside his (your) animosity to Fenway and the PCSD "nothing else" motivated his actions, I then assume the concerns for the local tribes have been meet, and for that matter never were a factor! Perhaps the source of the odor has been identified for you.
You imply that original supports of the project may think of you as stupid. Sometimes it's okay to be stupid. I was confident that the short sellers of Fenway had no new manipulation available after Fenway had identified the financing, and was completing the EIS, which even its most ardent critics now would admit strongly supports the completion of the project. I may have been stupid not to see the powerful and unethical forces allied against it. There are worst things than being called stupid. The actions of your paper, and the VSE are calculated efforts, in my opinion, to aid unethical individuals who have recognized they missed an opportunity to benefit from a legitimate project, and almost missed an opportunity to pay back political or personal enemies. I don't think you and Mr. Reynoso are stupid, rather something worse. At least you can still be aware of the stink. You've help produce it!
If you or your associates have had your lives threatened, I'm sure Fenway has had no hand in it. While I can understand the anger you and your associates have generated, I condemn any threats or actions, which in anyway endanger human lives!
However, I don't agree that Fenway shareholders will accept quietly any losses. It is obvious that the company has overcome the forces which doubted that it could have the talent, and foresight to see the project to completion. They have come far, and have completed their requirements in a professional manner having presented the PCSD with an EIS. The PCSD must make a decision to accept and reaffirm their support for the project based on this EIS. The DENR will make its decision based on the EIS and recommendation of the PCSD. Financing is a natural consequence. As a shareholder, I will not stand idly by and see the project stolen by those who plotted against it. Get use to the stink, you are in up to your neck!! |
