Posted on 09/19/2006 7:50:15 AM PDT by bryedge
http://www.thesanitycheck.com/BobsS...53/Default.aspx
"Dr. Byrne said that Orrin Hatch is fearful for Dr. Byrne's life. And said that he wanted Patrick to get out the message that he would move the earth to get whoever did it, should Patrick meet with an untimely end - hit by a car, plane goes down, chokes on a chicken bone, takes two slugs to the back of the head in a "suicide."
Bob O'Brien - "I'm sure that there are a few "journalists" who believe they know better than Intelligence Committee leaders, and believe that trying to expose my ID poses me no risk. I've had discussions with some that mock my fears. They take the tack that it is all silliness."
Mark Faulk - "This is no surprise. Someday I'll list all the veiled threats (and some not so subtle) that I've gotten since this began. I'm guessing everyone involved has similar stories to tell. PAY ATTENTION FOLKS!!!! These people are dangerous, these aren't just a bunch of rich guys annoyed because we're stepping on their money making schemes. They are dangerous, dangerous people. My name has been out there for years, and my only consolation is that Patch has been there even longer and he's still pissing off every crook in the country. I keep telling him that the reason I call him all the time is to make sure he's okay so I'll know if I need to go into the witness protection program."
Dr. Patrick Byrne - "Jim Cramer is as bent as they get. He says he's never heard of Gradient on his show, but there are emails between Becky Quick (CNBC) and Gradient where she is saying Jim loves the Gradient material."
"The SEC is in the pocket of Wall Street."
"The system could experience vapor lock, and make 1929 look like a Sunday picnic."
Nothing is going to happen to him, because the people he is suing are laughing at him for the frivolous lawsuit he is going to lose.
He is threat to nobody - just a laughingstock. And a legend in his own mind.
There is nothing "corrupt" about short-selling the stock of publicly traded companies. It's a standard market practice which protects investors.
Are you going to give us a clue to what this is about?
short selling is fine... naked shorts are a different matter.
Investors who believe that Overstock.com is a lousy company shorted their stock, just as investors short the stock of every single company in the world every day.
Byrne didn't like people shorting the company's stock, so he sued them.
He is a paranoid megalomaniac, so he believes that he is incredibly powerful and incredibly hated - when in reality he has zero pull and is considered a joke.
Not really. Market makers sell stocks naked short every minute of every trading day.
"He is a paranoid megalomaniac"
Now I recognize it, the subject shows up here occasionally.
and keep borrowing the same shares over and over...
SEC & DTCC get a fee on each transaction, whether the stock is delivered or not (mostly not).
Little lawsuit to keep an eye on, at the Fed level, is filed in Florida - Universal Express v. SEC
Byrnes is a whack job and now Hatch has embarrassed himself
Dr. Patrick Byrne is a national hero.
Rocker Partners, SAC, Gradient and several so-called "journalist" like Carol Remond and Herb Greenberg are just a sample of the gutter trash that are being exposed for the criminals they really are. Overstock.com's lawsuit is moving forward and comments like yours won't be worth a sympathetic laugh (at your stupidity).
Your misinformation speaks volumes to your agenda.
Failure-to-Delivers (aka Strategic Naked Short Selling, Counterfieting Stock, THEFT) with no intention of covering the trade is the issue, not some lame attempt by you to confuse the issue with legitimate short trades.
If the SEC was doing its job, if the DTCC was not counterfieting stock to balance their books instead of facilitating the illegal trading, Failures-to-Deliver would not be a problem and the Reg SHO Threshold List would not exist. Of course, the Threshold list PROVES that the illegal trading takes place regularly.
Also clearly evident, is that if the Wall Street elites were not making so much money off the backs of innocent investors, the practice of Strategic Naked Short Selling would not exist. By simply requiring a short seller to produce the stock BEFORE the DTCC gives the buyers money to the criminals, FTD's would not be the massive problem they are today.
Being so brilliant, please explain how a company could remain on the Threshold list for almost two years.
If you do not know anything about the huge scandal of Strategic Naked Short Selling, being facilitated by the biggest banks in this country (JP Morgan Chase, Morgan Stanley, Goldman Sachs, RBC, UBS, Toronto Dominion, Daiwa,etc), I would first recommend that you educate yourself, especially if you own any stock.
The best quick read available is at the website of the National Coalition Against Naked Short Selling (NCANS).
http://www.ncans.net/intro%20to%20naked%20short%20selling.htm
I would recommend paying close attention to the section covering Systemic Risk.
While the prime brokers are making record profits, they are also paying record fines. These fines are little more than bribes to keep their exec's out of jail. The fines are not for simple "rule violations", but for OBSTRUCTION OF JUSTICE and FRAUD. But instead of turning the crooks over to the Justice Dept., the SEC collects a fine, relatively small to the profits made, and protects their "masters".
This is a clear example of misinformation.
Failures-to-Deliver are being abused with the assistance of not only the DTCC, but the SEC, as well, and at a massive scale.
It was never intended that transactions take longer than three days to clear. But, because the DTCC caters to hedge funds over honest small investors, the DTCC fails to require short sellers to deliver the stock they are selling, refuses to collect the stock paid for by the buyer, counterfeits the stock, causing a host of problems, and refuses to return the buyers money when the delivery fails.
Brokers get their commissions, the DTCC gets its transaction fees, the criminal short seller gets the buyer's money, and the buyer, well, all he gets is SCREWED.
The ONE thing that you got right was that it is probably happening everyday, unchecked.
Had it not been for Morgan Stanley twisting the weak arms of State Legislators, the law would be in force instead of delayed.
The list of experts speaking out to the SEC against the status quo of Reg. SHO is very long and their comments can be read at the SEC's website.
A great submission by the United States Chamber of Commerce can be read at
http://www.uschamber.com/NR/rdonlyres/etgreycmkipkp4rlg6yskvgi65sihiocej7z2mngb6x5mnw4bgrysyexjlmfi6rsyd5fkmjuc4ujxaeh2hq2arz2srh/060913_reg_sho.pdf
From the United States Chamber of Commerce
"However, under the current system there are too many naked short sells that are not legitimate. Trades are executed without the basic economic discipline of supply and demand - and accordingly, naked shorting is used to manipulate markets and purposely drive down thinnly traded stocks to the detriment of investors and our capital markets generally."
LOL! Who are you, his mommy?
"My little Paddy is a hero!"
Here's a suggestion: actual heroes do not insist on being referred to as "Dr." - especially when their doctorate is in philosophy and their day job is mismanaging a business that sells other people's leftover crap into the ground.
of the gutter trash . . . your stupidity).
Thanks for the blather.
Failure-to-Delivers . . . with no intention of covering the trade is the issue
Equivalent to a bank depositor complaining that his bank made him wait until Monday morning to withdraw the cash from the check he deposited.
the Threshold list PROVES that the illegal trading takes place regularly
No, it proves that sellers have failed to deliver shares. Which is not illegal.
the Wall Street elites were not making so much money off the backs of innocent investors, the practice of Strategic Naked Short Selling would not exist
No matter what prices investors willingly pay for Wall Street firms' services, intelligent investors would still continue to short lousy stocks.
please explain how a company could remain on the Threshold list for almost two years
Because 0.5% of its shares fail to deliver each week.
OK, Mrs. Byrnes.
convince the Utah Governor to sign legislation forcing the prime brokers to divulge their complicit criminal activity
Private business transactions between vendors and customers should not become the target of witchhunts because little Paddy wants to blame someone else for his inability to run OSTK.
Governors have enacted tons of stupid, pointless in US history and will continue to do so.
Had it not been for Morgan Stanley twisting the weak arms of State Legislators
Right. No one can disagree with little Paddy unless they are somehow being dishonest. No one can legitimately take the other side of his preposterous argument.
The list of experts speaking out to the SEC against the status quo of Reg. SHO is very long
I see - you can make a lame argument into a good argument by appending a long list of names to it. Interesting thesis.
the United States Chamber of Commerce
The USCC is a political lobbying group that argues for its own agenda. Citing them as some sort of authority means absolutely nothing.
How cute, and petty insults. I guess it depends on what your definition of brilliant is.
Away from the financial issues, Byrne has continued his pursuit of "a cabal" that he believes is out to destroy the Big O...
Byrne held an August conference call with financial analysts about this cabal that has since gone down in Wall Street history as perhaps the single most bizarre CEO moment of all time. During the session, Byrne admitted to making up stories about being gay and a coke-head in the hopes of uncovering a mysterious group short-sellers led by a "Sith Lord." These individuals allegedly engineered an intricate conspiracy to cripple Overstock. Part of the conspiracy included tapping Byrne's phone calls and apparently some kind of spy ring...
"I can tell you they are going to come after me in January," Byrne said..... You'll probably read a headline that I was stopped with drugs or a dead body."...
http://www.theregister.co.uk/2005/12/29/overstock_stock_dip/page2.html
To repeat, shorting is legal.
It is your lack of decency being exposed. By placing "Dr." in front of Patrick's name is simply out of respect, not demanded by anyone. I would even consider calling you "Dr." after you graduated from high school and later earned a doctorate. LOL
Equivalent to a bank depositor complaining that his bank made him wait until Monday morning to withdraw the cash from the check he deposited.
Again, pure misinformation. The similarity is not even close, but I would bet (even) you know that.
The Threshold List does indeed prove that illegally trading is taking place. Unlike your misstatement, in order to showup on the Threshold List, the stock has to experience FTD's for at least 13-days, WHICH IS ILLEGAL per the Securties Act of 1934.
How would you explain the "Grandfathering Clause" of Reg SHO? If there was nothing illegal, why would the SEC (Wall Street) insist on forgiving the crime, over and over, and over....?
No matter what prices investors willingly pay for Wall Street firms' services, intelligent investors would still continue to short lousy stocks.
And as long as a corrupt SEC continues to coverup the crimes of the prime brokers and their ilk, the criminals will continue to strategically naked short stocks of targeted companies, DESPITE THE VIABILITY OF THAT COMPANY.
When did the SEC obtain the power of the pardon?
Even in their press releases, the SEC admits that the criminals have committed obstruction of justice and fraud, ALL FELONIES, but instead of referring to the Justice Dept., the SEC accepts a bribe, relatively very small compared to the money stolen, and allows the crooks to "never admit nor deny" anything, making it virtually impossible for a civil lawsuit.
No problaymo - his stock is going down, just like e-bay and others in the sector and he cries foul. I guess he was brilliant when his stock was making money though. Buying on margin is not illegal shorting and an accusation by a nut is not evidence. Even if naked shorting is an issue your Dr. B is a wacko. You are free to trust anyone you want and free to be wrong, gotto love America
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.