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 : Booms, Busts, and Recoveries -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: energyplay who wrote (65481)	6/24/2005 3:51:46 PM
From: Slagle	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 74559

energyplay Re:"Cramer" What do you make of the Cramer call Wednesday about CSCO and MSFT? I'm not one for conspiracy <g> but....many of the points you have made about the quarter end ect., and correctly too, well don't you think Cramer knew that also? I'm watching QQQQ and I have never seen such action. The time and sales column is just a blur, moving so fast you can't read the numbers. If Cramer, AFTER a big sell off had said that it was time to buy that would be different. You mentioned somewhere that there was now a "Cramer" effect. I believe it. Yesterday, the day after the Cramer rant MSFT and CSCO really ramped up on whopping volume and MSFT even had a gain for the day. That MUST have been the Cramer effect, what else would explain it? I'm beginning to worry about oil now too. This morning that CNBC "floor trader" dude at the CME (Jack Barogiane sp? who is a shameless stock pumper) was talking about "Saudi Oilfield depletion" and $80 oil. It could be the end. I'm nearly through with the Simmons book and its pretty good reading. One thing I thought about when I first heard about this Saudi business was that there are bound to be people who worked over there years ago who would know about the Saudi oil assets. I have a friend who worked over there in the early 1980's, but as a pipe welder. I've asked him but he doesn't have a clue. But I HAVE seen two posts on message boards by guys who said they did exploration work over there years ago, one on Value Forum and one on yahoo which tend to confirm the Simmonds book. Slagle

To: energyplay who wrote (65481)	6/25/2005 1:51:58 AM
From: elmatador	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 74559

Ultra-conservative win possible end to Iran's fragile social reforms and tentative rapprochement with the West. Hardline mayor wins Iran election June 25, 2005 - 3:09PM Ultra-conservative Tehran mayor Mahmoud Ahmadinejad swept to a landslide win in presidential elections today, spelling a possible end to Iran's fragile social reforms and tentative rapprochement with the West. Ahmadinejad, 48, won the backing of the religious poor to defeat veteran political heavyweight Akbar Hashemi Rafsanjani, who was supported by pro-reform parties and wealthy Iranians fearful of a hardline monopoly on power in the Islamic state. "The figures show that Ahmadinejad is the winner," Interior Ministry spokesman Jahanbakhsh Khanjani told reporters. He will be Iran's first non-cleric president for 24 years when he takes office in August. An official at the Guardian Council, which must approve the election results, said that out of 24.8 million votes counted, Ahmadinejad had 61.7 per cent, defying forecasts of a tight race. Officials said turnout was about 26 million, or 56 per cent, down from the 63 per cent of Iran's 46.7 million eligible voters who cast ballots in an inconclusive first round on June 17. "It's over, we accept that we've lost," said a close aide to Rafsanjani, who was president from 1989 to 1997. Advertisement AdvertisementAlthough Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei has the last word on all matters of state, a hardline presidency removes the moderating influence on decision-making exercised by outgoing reformist President Mohammad Khatami since 1997. "This all but closes the door for a breakthrough in US-Iran relations," said Karim Sadjadpour, Tehran-based analyst for the International Crisis Group. Washington broke ties with Iran in 1980 and now accuses it of developing nuclear weapons and supporting terrorism. Iran, the world's fourth-largest oil producer, denies the charges. "I think Ahmadinejad is less amenable to compromise on the nuclear issue, but it is unclear how much influence he will have on it," said Sadjadpour. The result was a crushing blow to Rafsanjani, 70, who has been at the forefront of Iranian politics since the 1979 Islamic revolution and was widely considered Iran's second most powerful figure before the vote. His last venture to the polls in 2000 parliamentary elections also ended in failure. Rafsanjani voters said they feared Ahmadinejad would reverse modest reforms made under Khatami that allow women to dress in brighter, skimpier clothes and couples to fraternise in public without fear of arrest. Washington repeated accusations that the vote was unfair due to the disqualification of more than 1,000 hopeful candidates. "With the conclusion of the election in Iran, we have seen nothing that dissuades us from our view that Iran is out of step with the rest of the region and the currents of freedom and liberty that have been so apparent in Iraq, Afghanistan and Lebanon," State Department spokeswoman Joanne Moore said. "These elections were flawed from their inception by the decision of an unelected few to deny the applications of over a thousand candidates, including all 93 women," she said. "We will judge the regime by its actions. In light of the way these elections were conducted, however, we remain sceptical that the Iranian regime is interested in addressing either the legitimate desires of its own people, or the concerns of the broader international community," Moore said. Supreme Leader Khamenei banned victory celebrations after a fractious campaign marred by allegations of dirty tricks. Aides to Rafsanjani had accused the hardline Basij militia of intimidating voters to back Ahmadinejad. The Interior Ministry also complained of illegal election-day campaigning.