[pedalling_faster]

it's there in black & white, and i still have doubts that it's real.

excerpted from From the Wilderness -

"Baker wrote:

… Business Week Online has just reported that George W. Bush on May 5 signed a memo entitled “Assignment Of Function Relating To Granting Of Authority For Issuance Of Certain Directives: Memorandum For The Director Of National Intelligence.” In the document, Bush assigned intelligence czar, John Negroponte, the task of waiving Securities and Exchange Commission rules, established in 1934, pertaining to accounting disclosures by publicly traded companies. As a result of no longer needing to reveal financial information to shareholders in the name of national security, the cloning of Enron, having been in process for several years, is now complete. Instead of being required to disclose valid accounting ledgers, U.S. corporations have now been given carte blanche to maintain fiduciary legerdemain. I must ask: How can any sane human being persist in believing that a legitimate government exists in the United States?

Let me describe exactly what this means more succinctly.

The BusinessWeek article reported the following:

Now, the White House’s top spymaster can cite national security to exempt businesses from reporting requirements.

President George W. Bush has bestowed on his intelligence czar, John Negroponte, broad authority, in the name of national security, to excuse publicly traded companies from their usual accounting and securities-disclosure obligations. Notice of the development came in a brief entry in the federal register.

Unbeknownst to almost all of Washington and the financial world, Bush and every other President since Jimmy Carter have had the authority to exempt companies working on certain top-secret defense projects from portions of the 1934 Securities Exchange Act. Administration officials told BusinessWeek that they believe this is the first time a President has ever delegated the authority to someone outside the Oval office. It couldn’t be immediately determined whether any company has received a waiver under this provision..."

[hr]

the excerpt preface by the name "Baker" refers to an article Carolyn Baker wrote, the article was published by FTW.

more SEC rules -

"FTW made a little trip to the statute books also. This is section 13(b)(3)(A) of the Securities Exchange Act:

With respect to matters concerning the national security of the United States, no duty or liability under paragraph (2) of this subsection shall be imposed upon any person acting in cooperation with the head of any Federal department or agency responsible for such matters if such act in cooperation with such head of a department or agency was done upon the specific, written directive of the head of such department or agency pursuant to Presidential authority to issue such directives. Each directive issued under this paragraph shall set forth the specific facts and circumstances with respect to which the provisions of this paragraph are to be invoked. Each such directive shall, unless renewed in writing, expire one year after the date of issuance.

This is Paragraph 2

Every issuer which has a class of securities registered pursuant to section 12 and every issuer which is required to file reports pursuant to section 15(d) shall--

A. Make and keep books, records, and accounts, which, in reasonable detail, accurately and fairly reflect the transactions and dispositions of the assets of the issuer;

B. Devise and maintain a system of internal accounting controls sufficient to provide reasonable assurances that—

i. transactions are executed in accordance with management’s general or specific authorization;

ii. transactions are recorded as necessary (I) to permit preparation of financial statements in conformity with generally accepted accounting principles or any other criteria applicable to such statements, and (II) to maintain accountability for assets;

iii. access to assets is permitted only in accordance with management's general or specific authorization; and

iv. the recorded accountability for assets is compared with the existing assets at reasonable intervals and appropriate action is taken with respect to any differences; and

C. notwithstanding any other provision of law, pay the allocable share of such issuer of a reasonable annual accounting support fee or fees, determined in accordance with section 109 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002."

[hr]

my eyes glaze over, trying to read all that.

so i'm checking with the Minds here.

a For Example -
Morgan Stanley Profit More Than Doubles

OK, well, not a great example. it's very possible that they had a crappy quarter that the current quarter is being compared to. out of the 10,000+ companies that the financial media reports on, they will always be able to create such headlines, and have them be literally accurate.

i have seen clinical trial results falsified in the medical industry (in my opinion, a crippled patient was removed from a LASIK trial conducted by Bausch & Lomb in conjunction with Loma Linda U. & a Dr. Thomas Tooma in Newport Beach, in about January 1999.)

i have also witnessed non-factual reporting in the defense electronics industry (the Nira Schwartz case i cite because it is in the public domain, it relates to missile defense.)

so, this leaves me with a gut feeling about the Dow - it will be manipulated by excluding companies that do poorly during Peak Oil, and so on. Google, Exxon, and Barrick Gold - the New Dow.

[hr]

final aside - are the laws in place, or will they be created, to make it difficult to report the actual SEC rules ?