Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Strategies & Market Trends : VOLTAIRE'S PORCH-MODERATED -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Cactus Jack who wrote (51884)	5/22/2002 3:47:14 AM
From: stockman_scott	Respond to of 65232

Why did our intelligence system fail...?? thenation.com Americans deserve some answers...We clearly need an unbiased Blue-Ribbon Commission (made up of some of the best minds in the country) to examine why 9/11 happened and what can be done to prevent future terrorist attacks on our shores...Remember that famous saying that those that fail to lean from the past are condemned to repeat it in the future. Folks realize that I voted for Bush BUT at times I feel its important to ask tough questions...After Pearl Harbor we had a Commission investigate why it happened and make recommendations -- 9/11 was even a bigger intelligence failure --> the system that we spend over $30 BILLION / year on has failed us...It didn't work well in the Clinton years and it hasn't worked well in The Bush years. I personally feel we need totally new management for both the CIA and the FBI....I'm a little frustrated that our administration appears to be more interested in covering its rear than being honest with us. I hope I'm wrong. In the last 48 hours why do we keep hearing all the very general terrorism threats...?? Have they really been helpful...?? Have things changed that much...?? They may have helped the terrorists do their job and instill more fear in Americans...Lets support the President but lets figure out what really happened and discover why our expensive and outdated intelligence system failed us --> lets IMPROVE A SYSTEM THAT'S BROKEN...Here's what John McCain has to say... Probe Deep, and Fairly By John McCain The Washington Post Wednesday, May 22, 2002; Page A37 President Bush is a patriot. He responded forcefully to the terrorist attacks of Sept. 11. And had he known that enemies of the United States were planning to seize four passenger aircraft and crash them into American buildings, I'm sure he would have done everything in his power to stop them. We can also safely assume that Vice President Cheney is a patriot, and a watchful guardian of our national security. That said, the government of the United States, which they now have the privilege of leading, failed the American people in the weeks, months and years leading up to Sept. 11. The Sept. 11 attacks were incredibly depraved but not, as it turns out, unimaginable. As early as 1995, an accomplice of Ramzi Yousef revealed that the mastermind behind the 1993 World Trade Center attack intended to plant bombs on 12 U.S.-bound airliners and crash a light plane packed with explosives into CIA headquarters. The accomplice had trained as a pilot at three separate U.S. flight schools. In 1999 the Library of Congress prepared a report for the National Intelligence Council warning that al Qaeda suicide bombers "could crash-land an aircraft packed with high explosives" into the Pentagon, CIA or the White House. Last July Kenneth Williams, an FBI field agent in Phoenix, suspected that terrorists had enrolled in an Arizona pilot training school. He urged the bureau to begin investigating whether other U.S. flight schools might be training terrorists to fly. A month later, FBI agents in Minnesota arrested flight school student Zacarias Moussaoui, whose lack of interest in learning how to land an aircraft had aroused the suspicions of his instructors, who dutifully alerted the FBI. It is uncertain how far up the chain of command suspicions about Moussaoui's intentions traveled. A week before Sept. 11, the FBI did notify the FAA of Moussaoui's arrest, his terrorist connections, and his interest in flying large commercial aircraft. The FAA chose not to share this rather pertinent information with the airlines. Throughout last summer, CIA analysts were increasingly anxious that Osama bin Laden's operatives were planning imminent terrorist attacks against the United States and possibly planning to hijack planes in this country. The agency shared its concern with the president in August. Apparently no one from either the CIA or the FBI shared with the president information that terrorists might intend to use hijacked planes to destroy civilian and government targets. Nor did the FBI and CIA make much of a habit of sharing information with each other. Had they done so, one presumes the President's Daily Briefing on Aug. 6 would have included a suspicion that the hijackers might have something much more atrocious than ransom demands on their agenda. As administration officials have observed, the president is not expected to work as an intelligence case officer. It is not his job to drag from different agencies various bits of information, murky clues and suspicions that, considered together, begin to reveal the dimensions of a clear and present danger. But it is the responsibility of officials who serve at his pleasure. Asking for, urging and demanding answers for why various agencies of the federal government failed to understand the enormity of the danger facing the United States is an obligation shared by all elected federal officials. As is the responsibility for understanding why and how the previous administration failed to combat the growing menace of international terrorism more effectively. As is responsibility for questioning Congress's inability or unwillingness to exercise more diligently its oversight responsibilities for these agencies. As is the expectation that officials who did not competently discharge their responsibilities be held accountable. It's hardly a surprise in a lively democracy that partisan and institutional loyalties will influence both sides of an honest debate on the most critical challenge confronting the federal government. The administration's critics and its defenders suspect each other of motives less civic-minded than an honest search for answers, impairing our own and the public's ability to arrive at fair conclusions about what went wrong and how to repair it. This is all the more reason to consider empaneling an independent commission of trustworthy, experienced statesmen who, if not entirely devoid of partisan loyalties, are sufficiently removed by time and wisdom from the appeal of such loyalties to know when they conflict with the national interest. Give them complete access to all intelligence reports and internal documents with arguable relevance to their inquiry, and charge them with rendering a judgment about who failed and why in this administration and its predecessors, as well as in Congress, and with recommending appropriate remedies to guard against a recurrence. An independent inquiry will not impose a serious burden on the administration as it prosecutes our just war against terrorism, any more than a similar inquiry after Pearl Harbor impeded Franklin D. Roosevelt's prosecution of World War II. Nor should it prevent members of Congress, the press or any American citizen from questioning or criticizing the government's apparent failures before and after President Bush's inauguration. All wars and national security failures have occasioned contemporaneous criticism, and the Republic has managed to thrive. It is irresponsible in a time of war, or any time for that matter, to attack or defend unthinkingly or because partisan identification is one's supreme interest. But it is not responsible or right to shrink from offering thoughtful criticism when and to whom it is due, and when the consequences of incompletely understanding failures of governance are potentially catastrophic. On the contrary, such timidity is indefensibly irresponsible especially in times of war, so irresponsible that it verges on the unpatriotic. _____________________ The writer is a Republican senator from Arizona. © 2002 The Washington Post Company washingtonpost.com

To: Cactus Jack who wrote (51884)	5/22/2002 11:43:31 AM
From: Mannie	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 65232

Photos of success: Thanks to everyone that helped with our water project in Vietnam. Here are the first shots of your money at work. The first well has been drilled and is running cold, clean and strong. The second well will be started this weekend. Both wells will have large holding tanks to keep the water clean for the villagers. Photos: Mr Hung at the new well photo.net Mr Hung is the caretaker of the village, he fought the government long and hard to get this project ok'd. He has done an incredible job that was not without potential risks to him. Water photo.net Villagers photo.net Thanks again to everyone that helped us out. Scott

To: Cactus Jack who wrote (51884)	5/22/2002 5:04:08 PM
From: stockman_scott	Respond to of 65232

Nokia returns with Redback deal by Joshua Jaffe TheDeal.com Updated 04:22 PM EST, May-22-2002 Wireless giant Nokia Oy returned to the dealmaking arena in Silicon Valley after a year long absence, acquiring a 10% stake in struggling network equipment-maker Redback Networks Inc.in a transaction small in size but replete with larger significance. Nokia said Wednesday, May 22, it would invest $34.5 million in cash in Sunnyvale, Calif.-based Redback, a leading manufacturer of broadband aggregation equipment. The Espoo, Finland-based company, famed for the manufacture of mobile handsets, will purchase 17.1 million shares of unregistered stock priced at $2.02 per share leaving it with 10% of Redback's outstanding equity. Nokia was also granted Redback warrants that could take its stake to 19.9% within 18 months of the closing of the investment. But Redback chief executive Kevin DeNuccio said in a telephone interview that the chance of Nokia taking over his $400 million company is not yet in the cards. "We're not contemplating that at this time," he said. Nonetheless, the timing of Nokia's latest foray into the Valley is indicative of movements afoot in the network equipment arena. With demand for telecom gear still low, communications equipment vendors are choosing to sign distribution agreements rather than spend money to develop their own products. "All the companies in this sector are trying to look at ways of getting access to products without spending that much on development and focusing their own development on fewer segments," said Jan Dworsky, an analyst at Credit Agricole Indosuez Chevreux in Stockholm. The upshot: the hoped-for return of the telecom companies to the acquisition trail may be some ways off yet. Instead, the recent spate of trans-Atlantic networking partnership agreements is being driven by a desire to offer telecommunication carriers a complete range of products. Earlier this week, Silicon Valley-based core and edge router manufacturer Juniper Networks Inc., which already has a cooperation agreement with Nokia-archrival Ericsson AB, signed a reseller agreement with Munich-based Siemens AG. Nokia and Siemens also both resell San Jose, Calif.-based Cisco Systems Inc.'s core routers, which forward data packets to computer hosts within a network. In contrast, edge routers direct data between local area networks and a backbone network. Redback's DeNuccio explained that Nokia's equity investment is designed to solidify the sales and technology development agreement that the two sides announced Wednesday. Redback hopes Nokia can boost the sale of its digital subscriber line (DSL) equipment and a new line of large edge routers to wireless telecom carrier customers in Asia and Europe Nokia in turn hopes Redback can increase sales of its own DSL access multiplexers, or DSLAMs, and smaller edge routers to non-wireless carriers in the US. DSLAMs are located in a carriers' central office and route numerous DSL connections onto a network backbone. Nokia and Redback will also work to develop in the next 18 months an Internet Protocol architecture for both wireline and wireless carriers that applications developers can design new network services on. Nokia's nvestment in Redback is its first deal in Silicon Valley this year. The company's last acquisition occurred in July, when it announced the $421 million acquisition of Fremont, Calif.-based Amber Networks Inc., a privately held developer of fault-tolerant network routing platforms. Nokia is trying to use Amber Network's technology to develop a wireless edge routing system. Ari Lehtoranta, senior vice president at Nokia's broadband systems unit, declined to say whether the company has written off any of that earlier deal. Lehtoranta will join Redback in the wake of its Wednesday's deal with Nokia. Nokia has consistently looked to Northern California for technology outside of its core competency in the wireless. arena. In December 2000, for example, the company acquired Santa Clara, Calif.-based Internet security device maker Ramp Networks Inc. for $126 million. In February that year Nokia acquired Santa Cruz, Calif.-based Internet Protocol cluster software designer Network Alchemy Inc. for $325 million. And in 1999 the Finnish company bought Petaluma, Calif.-based Diamond Lane Communications Inc. for $125 million. In fact, Nokia first entered the DSL equipment market with the Diamond Lane purchase, though the company still trails far behind Paris-based Alcatel SA, Cisco and Murray Hill, N.J.-based Lucent Technologies Inc. in market share. The Redback deal could help Nokia on that front. For Redback, though, the deal is even more important. Nokia's investment is designed to provide its investors and customers with assurances that it can achieve its stated break-even point, targeted for the fourth quarter of this year, with its existing cash resources. Prior to the Nokia deal, the company forecasted it would have $125 million at the end of June. "For Redback, this is a milestone in our strategy that puts the company into a real contender for leadership status in IP networks for the world," said DeNuccio. The company hopes this step will reverse the company's downward spiral, which has seen its stock drop 89% in the past year to its Tuesday close of $2.27. Nokia's investment was priced at $2.02 per share, because that was the five-day average of Redback's stock for the week ended May 17. The stock is subject to a 90-day lockup period. Its shares began to rise dramatically late last week on rumors that Nokia might take a stake in Redback. Nokia can acquire additional stock in Redback by exercising warrants six, 12 or 18 months after the deal closes. Their exercise price will be based on Redback's stock price at the time. Credit Suisse First Boston and and Wilson Sonsini Goodrich & Rosati advised Redback in the transaction. Joel Arnold, Redback's senior vice president for worldwide field operations, led the company's in-house deal team. Nokia tapped Shearman & Sterling for legal counsel and did not use an outside financial adviser. Jurgen Schmidt, a Nokia vice president, led his company's in-house deal team.