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.

Technology Stocks : Loral Space & Communications -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: donss who wrote (3496)	5/29/1998 3:10:00 PM
From: dougjn	Read Replies (4) \| Respond to of 10852

Its what I've pieced together after reading all the NY Times and many other stories on the subject. If I wanted to put in the effort, I could quote to show you exactly how I came to this conclusion. But it's too much work to be worth it to me. However, I'm not claiming I can prove all of the above. However, everything I've seen is consistent with it and it seems to me the most likely. It does seem clear that the only possibly illegal or militarily questionable thing which Loral did was provide a copy of the 200 page insurance review to the Chinese. So the question becomes what did it say; how much information not already known to the Chinese was in there; how important were the Loral inputs to the Chinese? We also know that no one has really contested Loral's statements regarding the report. Instead, the press and the Republicans have been focused on inflamatory characterizations of the report-- eg. provided ICBM missile guidance technology to the Chinese -- rather than specific charges. They also have been focused on the role of B.Schwartz's political contributions. I thought the Time magazine piece I referenced did a very good job on that. If you understand how these things work, then you understand the role. Doesn't buy the policy. But does get your position a positively disposed hearing. Which can make all the difference. But lets also not forget that Hughes has been getting the same treatment, with much lesser (or no?) contributions to the DNC. I imagine it goes something like this. B.Schwartz became a rich man serving his country and his shareholders by building some of this countries most sophisticated Desert Storm type electronic warfare munitions. (The old Loral.) He has been a lifelong Democrat. He feels that it is his obligation and privilege to give back to his country, and especially to his party. It is natural that those who serve in leadership roles and do give back, are viewed more favorably when they seek some loosening in policies in line with the President's own post Cold War views as to the position of America and American leading technology global businesses in the world. And now the old "who lost China" right wing lobby (note, NOT the George Bush type of internationalist Republican who is often anathema to this group) is trying to demonize both the policy and the President, as well as anyone else that can be caught up in those cross hairs. Doug Doug