I am sporadically back, here are Readware's comments on the China mess.
Personally, I am staying clear of the 2001 LEAPS at the moment, they are very pricey. Perhaps they will become a better deal if LOR calms down and becomes quite a bit less volatile. I am looking to add to my position, but prefer to wait until I see a clear bottom form, no reason to jump on in while LOR is still on the way down, I'd rather catch it when it stops, or when is begins going back up.
========================
Subject: Re: More Drudge-May 16th
Date: Sun, May 17, 1998 12:36 EDT
From: Readware
Message-id: <1998051716362800.MAA09613@ladder01.news.aol.com>
Thank you UUplink for the citation of this NY Times article. Ennui on my part was developing at being the only one to state assertorically that neither Loral nor Hughes had violated laws. That the NY Times has come out with the piece you cite indicates its awareness that "this dog ain't gonna hunt".
Are the politics of this issue "empty space on this board", especially when the charges brought against those involved can break their lives as they are left swaying in the wind?
Or needs a shareholder fear of being wiped out in his holdings in Loral before the politics ceases to be "empty space on this board".
While MorrisM's previous post regarding my citation has not posted the GAO document correctly-- and I am through with that discussion (I am comfortably possessed of the accurately numbered GAO document I cited, and others)-- curiosity is piqued as to who has voiced the appropriate objections to the calumny against the non-management employees in question of the companies involved with those US government personnel-- where the objections land
four-square and punitively-- after, of course, the appropriate inquiry/research on the objector's part?
Perhaps one has to know where to look, whom to contact. Did I say that before?
Thanks again for the post Uuplink.
Subject: Re: Long March explosion
Date: Sun, May 17, 1998 15:43 EDT
From: Readware
Message-id: <1998051719430700.PAA26911@ladder01.news.aol.com>
Great work Ok2launch. Some Congressman, it was posted by one of the posters here, said "hundreds died" in the blast and it was, the Congressman is reported to have said, confirmed. I do not know if in fact this was said by that Congressman-- only recounting what was posted here. I had replied there was no truth to the statement, having received Chinese written reports in their newspapers back at that time. Maybe they are not to be
believed? The US State Dept. reported at the time that no American company was involved in the actual destruction that occurred, which is what I had written about the US companies involved. The State Dept. further reported that it could not identify any deaths resulting from the explosion itself.
Thanks for the post Ok2launch.
As for two emails to me "on the silence of Loral". Did not Loral publicly deny in the US press any wrongdoing in this matter the day the first NY Times report came out on this issue-- and in fact in that article itself?. And did not the Loral chairman deny it in the Chinese press also? And did he not at the Loral annual shareholder meeting 28 April 1998 , in the presence of his board of directors and lawyers, also deny any involvement in the illicit
transfer of death dealing nuclear delivery technologies to China in direct response to a question on that? The transcript of the shareholder meeting shows that he did.
The media have given him space for Loral's denial, as well as for the charges others speculated--- away from which charges the NY Times article UUplink posted today has started to distance itself. First the NY Times posted the charges, and now report that The US Dept of Commerce in fact asked for Clinton's approval of certain technologies for China satellites after all...
Odd, no? First the charges...... then the clarification.
Subject: Price Action
Date: Mon, May 18, 1998 15:52 EDT
From: Readware
Message-id: <1998051819522200.PAA07781@ladder03.news.aol.com>
We know of no reason for the price action today. The seconday (16 million shares) should be priced sometime in mid-June, with a road show preceding the secondary offering. No launch has been rescheduled, no changes at all in the company's announced business plans, no fundamental change that we can see in the satcom industry that would alter the outlook for the company's announced business plan.
Subject: Re: Loral Responds to Allegations
Date: Mon, May 18, 1998 20:23 EDT
From: Readware
Message-id: <1998051900235600.UAA12493@ladder01.news.aol.com>
The Loral response is as I had stated over the past four weeks regarding it.
Perhaps, however, I and Bernard Schwartz are liars.
I find the attacks made against me recently, because of the statements I documented for the benefit of readers here on this political issue of Loral and Hughes, by some rabid posters on this Motley AOL board, to be quite personally offensive. Out of concern I made available information that I doubt anyone on this board could ever have secured. And then I have to read useless dither about what I wrote? From individuals who have no idea at all
about what this Loral/Hughes case involves? And could never have an idea.
Additionally, the attacks made about "right wingers" and "Christians"-- whatever the hell these labels mean-- I also find despicable, offensive, and close to vomit-inducing.
Who is anyone to call anyone a "fanatical Christian"? Who? I am not Christian-- but I'll be damned if I'll let that statement go by unchallenged. What's next? "Fanatical Jews?" What sort of people post on this board who would be so offensive to someone's deeply-held beliefs? Just because this board has no faces, no social security numbers against which to check who is and who is not what he or she says he or she is not-- on what grounds do
individuals take a public discussion board cover to belch their prejudices?
Pretty nauseating. This is what America has?
|
