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 : Anthony @ Equity Investigations, Dear Anthony, -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: StockDung who wrote (83128)	2/2/2003 10:34:00 PM
From: SEC-ond-chance	Respond to of 122087

Enough comics (well not really) News for now.... Saddam's bodyguard warns of secret arsenal 02feb03 SADDAM Hussein's senior bodyguard has fled with details of Iraq's secret arsenal. His revelations have supported US President George W. Bush's claim there is enough evidence from UN inspectors to justify going to war. Abu Hamdi Mahmoud has provided Israeli intelligence with a list of sites that the inspectors have not visited. They include: AN underground chemical weapons facility at the southern end of the Jadray Peninsula in Baghdad; A SCUD assembly area near Ramadi. The missiles come from North Korea; TWO underground bunkers in Iraq's Western Desert. These contain biological weapons. William Tierney, a former UN weapons inspector who has continued to gather information on Saddam's arsenal, said Mahmoud's information is "the smoking gun". "Once the inspectors go to where Mahmoud has pointed them, then it's all over for Saddam," Tierney said. Tierney, who has high-level contacts in Washington that go to the White House, said the information we publish today on Mahmoud's revelations "checks out, absolutely checks out". Mahmoud was a mem ber of the elite unit that protects Saddam. It is called the Murasiq Qun – the "Inner Circle". He was known as "The Gatekeeper". Mahmoud is a muscular Saddam lookalike often photographed standing behind Saddam when he is seated, or to his left when on the move. Last week, Mahmoud was being debriefed at a high-security base in Israel's Negev Desert. Ariel Sharon, the country's hard-line prime minister, has only allowed snippets of Mahmoud's sensational claims to be shared with the CIA and MI6. "Sharon intends to shatter the growing anti-war movement," a source close to Mr Sharon said. "He plans to call all those European leaders who are wavering to let them know how Saddam has continued to fool Hans Blix and his weapons inspectors." Mahmoud's revelations include locations of five bunkers buried beneath man-made sand dunes. Stockpiled in the bunkers are warheads identical to the empty shell cases found two weeks ago by the UN inspectors. Mahmoud said those shells were on their way to be refilled and stored in the bunkers. A transcript from his debriefing includes: "Saddam's weapons of mass destruction are also concealed in a tunnel complex deep beneath the sewers of Baghdad and in an underground complex in Ouja, to the north of Tikrit. "The complex was built five years ago with help from Chinese engineers. "The entrance to the site is through a house in Tikrit. It is the home of one of Saddam's cousins and is more than half a mile from where the weapons are stored." In another excerpt from his debriefing, Mahmoud boasts: "I was inside the innermost circle where Saddam eats and sleeps. "I was among the handful of bodyguards closest to him. "Very few people are allowed close to Saddam. "Many of the TV images you see of him were taken years ago. Most people now only speak to him over the phone. He usually calls them. "If they have to call him back with information he wants, it is passed through his sons (Uday and Qusay) or (Deputy Prime Minister) Tariq Aziz. "All those close to him have codes, which they use to access the outer circle. But even they can only come so close to Saddam before there is a cut-off point – the Inner Circle. Even Tariq Aziz is checked to see if he is carrying weapons. "Saddam knows fortunes are being offered to have him assassinated." Saddam's paranoia increased after Uday, his eldest son, narrowly escaped assassination when gunmen riddled his car with bullets in 1996. Uday was partially paralysed and uses a wheelchair. To avoid falling victim to even his own bodyguards, Saddam is a walking arsenal. "He has concealed guns all over his body," Mahmoud said. "He also has panic buttons to press if he even suspects somebody is about to attack him." Israeli intelligence sources have hinted that the deal with Mahmoud included smuggling his family out of Iraq. Mossad agents have done this before. At the start of Saddam's reign of terror, they persuaded an Iraqi pilot to fly his Russian fighter to Israel – after spiriting out his wife and children. heraldsun.news.com.au

To: StockDung who wrote (83128)	2/22/2003 9:55:30 PM
From: SEC-ond-chance	Respond to of 122087

A hard word from the ASX By Ann-Maree Moodie Opinion: Corporate Governance The Australian Stock Exchange's (ASX) Corporate Governance Council, established in August last year to agree on corporate governance standards for Australian listed companies, took a break over the holiday period to muse on the issue of independence. At that time, the council was split between two recommendations on the make-up of a board: one from a majority of independent directors, and one from a majority of non-executive directors (with one-third independent). But numbers were the least of the problems of the council, which consists of all key industry and stakeholder groups in the corporate governance debate. The biggest issue was defining "independence". In a late draft of its Principles of Good Corporate Governance and Best Practice Recommendations, the council determined: "The board should include a balance of executive and non-executive directors (including independent non-executives) such as that no individual or small group of individuals can dominate the board's decision-making." Perhaps the council was having its own problems with dominating members, and maybe Karen Hamilton should have exercised her obligations and authority as chair to illustrate the obvious: the council was confusing independence with influence. An independent director is no more likely to dominate proceedings than a non-executive director. An influential director is another matter. The key role of a board member is to argue and debate, and the chairman must allow discussion to occur during board meetings. But, assuming that well-argued and expressed views are common in Australia's boardrooms, let's move on to the other aspect of the council's deliberations on independent directors versus non-executive directors. According to the same draft document, "a majority of the board should be independent of management and free of any business or other relationship which could materially interfere with the exercise of their unfettered and independent judgment". Independence is certain if a director: 1. Is not a substantial shareholder of the company or an officer of, or otherwise associated directly with, a substantial shareholder of the company. 2. Has not, within the past three years, been employed in an executive capacity by the company or another group member, or been a director after ceasing to hold such employment. 3. Has not within the past three years been a principal or employee of a material professional adviser or a material consultant to the company or another group member. 4. Is not a material supplier or customer of the company or other group member or an officer or otherwise associated directly or indirectly with a significant supplier or customer. 5. Has no material contractual relationship with the company or another group member, other than as a director of the company. 6. Is free from any interest or any business or other relationship that could, or could reasonably be perceived to, materially interfere with the director's ability to act in the best interests of the company. The Australian Stock Exchange listing rules and guidance notes are a serious matter, so if this checklist is to be considered inflexible, Domenic Martino (who relinquished his position as chief executive of Deloitte Touche Tohmatsu over his membership of the board of the failed telco New Tel), will not be alone in the wilderness for long. In one swift move, the ASX will have demolished the boys' club and assured board search consultants of an uninterrupted cashflow for many years hence. But will the boardrooms of Australia be better off as a result? Take, for example, the former partner and national chairman of KPMG, David Crawford. He worked for KPMG or its predecessor firms for 30 years before retiring in 2001 to take up a portfolio of influential directorships: BHP Billiton, Foster's Group, National Foods, Westpac Banking Corporation and The Australian Ballet. Crawford's associations could run him foul of most of the points the ASX wants ticked off to be assured that a board member is independent. But by doing so, Australian business would lose someone of authority, experience and wisdom. Independence has been a theme of the recent release of corporate governance guidelines in Australia, as well as by the Sarbanes-Oxley Act in the US and the Higgs Report in Britain. But those involved with advising boards, as well as board members themselves, should be careful not to confuse integrity, experience and influence with independence. After all, if the ASX had trouble with the definition, how can it expect Australian boards not to? cfoweb.com.au