SI
SI
Advertise on SI

 Politics | Sioux Nation


Previous 10 | Next 10 
To: stockman_scott who wrote (58073)2/13/2006 1:40:27 PM
From: geode00   of 237924
 
You bet. Somewhere in all this is bipartisan concern from cloth coat republicans and progressives. Even libertarians and communists should be worried.

I mean, how many of us really want a king?

Share Recommend | Keep | Reply | Mark as Last Read | Read Replies (2)

To: geode00 who wrote (58092)2/13/2006 2:43:54 PM
From: stockman_scott   of 237924
 
Carlyle shows it’s still tops with defense deal

msnbc.msn.com 

<<...When British government officials decided to spin off the country's secret Ministry of Defense lab, their aim was to make the resulting company, Qinetiq PLC, into a lean-and-mean player in the commercial technology world.

But that was before District-based investment firm Carlyle Group hitched Qinetiq's wagon to the exploding U.S. defense market two years ago, turning a group of former British civil servants into the latest defense technology darling. Qinetiq went public on Friday in Britain, and the initial results indicate that Carlyle earned more than half a billion dollars from an initial investment of about $73 million, an eightfold return in three years that further cements its reputation as a savvy trader in the defense world.

Engineered by a Carlyle partner whose expertise lay as much in the soda-pop business as the defense industry, the Qinetiq deal was a classic return to form for the company. Carlyle has deep roots in the defense sector, dating to the days when former president George H.W. Bush, former British prime minister John Major and former U.S. defense secretary Frank Carlucci held senior advisory or executive positions. But in recent years, Carlyle has been mostly selling its defense assets and expanding into telecommunications, media, real estate and, with the recent purchase of Dunkin' Donuts Inc., the consumer retail trade.

"Carlyle, up until fairly recently, they were involved in selling and divesting a lot of their ownership interest in government contractors," said J. Richard Knop, senior managing director of BB&T Capital Markets/Windsor Group, an investment bank that specializes in the government contracting sector. "Now they're back and showing much of the same intelligence and timing they showed in the 1980s and 1990s."

A Carlyle spokesman declined to comment on the Qinetiq investment, though several sources familiar with the deal agreed to speak on the condition they not be identified.

Carlyle's defense-industry investments have often been controversial, and Qinetiq has been no exception.

Until 2001, Qinetiq was part of the Ministry of Defense, in essence the main research laboratory for Britain's defense establishment. The Qs in its name are a cheeky reference to the fictional character who created high-tech and often lethal spy gadgets for James Bond. Agency scientists were behind inventions as varied as the liquid crystal display and the vertical takeoff-and-landing gear on modern jet fighters. One of its chief specialties was radar technology.

The Ministry of Defense initially planned to spin off Qinetiq into a separate publicly traded company, reasoning that the commercial marketplace would help fund and accelerate innovations previously paid for by the British government.

The thinking at the time was also that Qinetiq's main growth would be in selling to nongovernmental customers.

But by 2002, the market for technology stock offerings had withered, and the Ministry of Defense began to look for a financial partner to take a major stake in the company, help it grow and then take it public in a few years.

More than 40 private equity firms initially bid for a minority stake in Qinetiq in an auction run by the Swiss banking firm UBS AG. Carlyle, according to public securities filings in Britain, made the most attractive financial offer for the smallest share of equity in the company: It paid $73 million for a one-third ownership stake in Qinetiq in January 2003, leaving the rest in the hands of the Ministry of Defense.

But, more significant, Carlyle secured a 51 percent voting interest in the company, giving it control.

What followed was a classic private equity growth story, one that the government contracting industry in Washington knows well.

Carlyle Managing Director Glenn A. Youngkin, who put together the Qinetiq deal and has sat on the company board since 2003, convinced Qinetiq's managers that the real opportunity was not in the private sector, but in the U.S. government market, where federal agencies were spending hundreds of billions on new technologies for homeland defense and high-tech warfare.

So Qinetiq went on a shopping spree, buying four U.S. companies in three years that do business with defense, intelligence and civilian government agencies here. Its most recent deal was last year's $288 million purchase of McLean systems contractor Apogen Technologies Inc.

The same acquisition strategy has been pursued by other large defense and technology companies, such as fellow British contractor BAE Systems and Falls Church-based General Dynamics Corp., in a buying binge that made dozens of owners of small and mid-size technology contractors rich in recent years.

About $600 million of Qinetiq's $1.5 billion in 2005 revenue came from the U.S. defense market. Carlyle and Qinetiq executives say that the company's U.S. growth, and the growing profitability of its British and European operations, account for what has been a quick and large rise in Qinetiq's value -- from an estimated $870 million when Carlyle acquired its interest three years ago, to around $2.3 billion when shares began trading on Friday.

"The growth story for Qinetiq is a U.S. growth story," Knop said.

Carlyle sold Qinetiq stock worth $281 million in Friday's offering, earning four times its initial investment right off the bat. Further, Carlyle still owns stock worth nearly $300 million. That makes nearly an 800 percent return, a figure that could grow if Qinetiq leverages its U.S. platform wisely.

The British government, through the Ministry of Defense, earned even more.

Yet some members of the British parliament say the Ministry of Defense severely undervalued Qinetiq in the 2003 deal with Carlyle. A former Labor Party defense official, in a television interview this month, likened the deal to post-Soviet-era Russia, where state-owned industries were privatized on the cheap, enriching friends of government officials. The National Audit Office, the British equivalent of the U.S. Government Accountability Office, has said it will investigate...>>

Share Recommend | Keep | Reply | Mark as Last Read | Read Replies (1)

To: SiouxPal who wrote (58057)2/13/2006 2:57:18 PM
From: CalculatedRisk   of 237924
 
Today's photo (from this month's People Magazine):
img.timeinc.net 

article:
people.aol.com 

Share Recommend | Keep | Reply | Mark as Last Read | Read Replies (2)

To: CalculatedRisk who wrote (58094)2/13/2006 3:09:31 PM
From: redfish   of 237924
 
Official Olympian Of The 2006 Sioux Board

Share Recommend | Keep | Reply | Mark as Last Read | Read Replies (1)

From: SiouxPal2/13/2006 3:26:12 PM
   of 237924
 


An Open Letter to the NSA About My Wiretap

by Beth Quinn

 
Dear National Security Agency,

As we all know now, you folks might be monitoring our phones on behalf of the president to discover whether we’re terrorists or maybe have impure thoughts.

So I’ve been thinking back on the phone conversations I’ve had with friends and family and family of friends and colleagues and people I’ve interviewed and the hardware store and that nutty librarian, trying to recall if perhaps I said anything that might have been misconstrued by your spooks.

And, innocent as all of those conversations were, I feel the need to clarify some of the remarks that may have been overheard and possibly regarded as suspicious.

It is for this reason I am writing to you.

First of all, I may have said something that could have come out sounding like, “I’m a Democrat.” If that happened, you should know that it was just a garbled line situation.

What I probably really said was, “I’m Adam’s cat.” That’s just a private joke I have with some friends, calling myself Adam’s cat. Long story, but rest assured it doesn’t have anything to do with bestiality. We live clean in our house.

Also, not that I want to turn my mother over to the authorities, but it was HER saying Bush looks like a chimpanzee, not ME. She gets her primates confused. It’s not her fault. She’s really a good American when she’s thinking right.

You should also know that sometimes I practice lines for a play I’m performing in when I’m on the phone, so it might seem like I’m criticizing the president when I say, “Bush is a lying sociopath,” but that’s just good ACTING!

In the play, I’ve got the role of the crazy person, so I’m just doing method acting, trying hard to feel crazy and get into the character.

And that time I said I was planning to take knitting needles on the airplane and hijack the plane? What a goofy joke THAT was! I’m a knitter. Really! My aunt taught me knitting when I was 10.

Once, in high school, I even knitted a cover for the pole belonging to a pole vaulter I had a crush on, mainly because it ended up too long and skinny to be considered a scarf. I’m the type of person who just sits quietly in a corner and knits peculiar things.

Now, on the subject of God, you should know that I’m very similar to President Bush – really! – in that God talks directly to me, too, mainly on the telephone. I know, I know. His voice is amazingly similar to my husband’s – God works in mysterious ways – but who am I to argue with God when he says, “Let us drinketh heavily of wine tonight to maketh the lies and blasphemy of the State of the Union speecheth more tolerableth.” I have no control over this kind of talk from God.

One other concern: I’ve told my friend in France, please never call me again. Not that I know any French people. If anyone called me from France, it was just a misdialing situation and it took us a while to realize we didn’t know each other, which would account for why we were on the line for so long. It’s hard to determine whether you know someone if he doesn’t speak English – they have a different word for everything in France.

And I’d like to add, for the record, that I’m foursquare in favor of everyone speaking English. It’s the correct language, and I agree with Bush 100 percent about the immigrants. Whatever that policy is regarding guest immigrants versus illegals, he’s probably right on the money.

I will confess to one thing, though. You know that time I called the Village Chinese Restaurant and asked for two egg rolls, a pint of wonton soup, an order of shrimp and Chinese vegetables and some General Tso’s? Can you find that in your records?

That was code.

Figure it out.

There are 1,077 more days ’til Inauguration 2009.
Published on Monday, February 13, 2006 by the Middletown Times-Herald Record (New York)

Share Recommend | Keep | Reply | Mark as Last Read

From: SiouxPal2/13/2006 3:35:35 PM
   of 237924
 
For the Love of God, Can't you Make him Stop?!

by Cindy Sheehan

 
Former President George Bush took a shot at protestor Cindy Sheehan on Friday while speaking to students at the University of Mary Hardin-Baylor.

Bush told the audience if she shows up to their church as expected she'll have to deal with his wife Barbara.
-- KVET News, Central Texas

On President's Day (Feb 20th), Gold Star Families for Peace, Veterans for Peace, and Code Pink are sponsoring an action in Houston, Tx. near the elder Bush's estate called, "For the Love of God. Can't you make him stop?"

We will be demonstrating in front of George, Sr. and Bar's church, St. Martin's Episcopal Church in Houston from 4pm to 7pm on President's Day on Monday, February 20th. And we have something to say to the Bush family (who apparently send their women to fight their battles): Bring Her On.

Mrs. Bush can read my sign with a big picture of my son, Casey, on it which will read: Your Son Killed My Son, Make him Stop!

George, Sr. says that I will have to deal with "Barbara." Well, SHE will have to deal with me and she will have to deal with: Amy Branham, whose son, Jeremy, was killed while in training to be deployed to Iraq; Juan Torres, whose son, John, was killed in Afghanistan while he was trying to expose the active drug trade on his post; Beatriz Saldivar, whose nephew, Daniel Torres, was killed in Iraq; Dede Miller, whose nephew, Casey, was killed in Iraq; and Bill Mitchell, whose son, Michael, was killed in the same incident in Iraq that my son was killed in.

We have some questions for Barbara so we hope she will come. Here are a few of our questions:

If you think that this war is such a "noble cause" why aren't any of your children, or grandchildren in combat over in Iraq?

Do you think that any of us wanted to trouble our "pretty minds" with images of flag draped coffins? Only for us, they weren't images. They were actual flag draped coffins carrying our dear loved ones. Not only are we troubled by these images, they are imprinted on our hearts and souls forever.

About how much money do you think the Bush family has raped from America over the years from war profiteering?

Did you ever wash Little George's mouth out with soap for lying?

Lately, we have heard from Larry Wilkerson how the intelligence and all of the pre-invasion posturing was a "hoax" how do you think that makes us feel? Our children are dead because of a trick played on the world by your son and his administration.

How many innocent Iraqis have died and how many are your family willing to have die before the travesty in Iraq ends?

I am sure that we will think of many more questions between now and next week.

So, we Gold Star Families for Peace, invite you Mrs. Barbara Bush, to a Tea Party in front of your church on Feb. 20, 2006 at 4pm in the afternoon. Come and "deal" with us. We welcome the opportunity to speak with you.

We will set an extra place at our Tea Party for Truth for you. Come join us.
commondreams.org 

Share Recommend | Keep | Reply | Mark as Last Read | Read Replies (3)

To: redfish who wrote (58095)2/13/2006 3:37:14 PM
From: SiouxPal   of 237924
 


The VEEP Who Couldn't Shoot Straight: Questions About Cheney's Hunting "Accident"

by Doug Ireland

 
The entire Cheney hunting accident story stinks. The delay in announcing it isCheney_2 suspicious, obviously. I'll bet Cheney had a few beers in him, but I'm not sure that is illegal in Texas (drinking and hunting is illegal in most states, but I couldn't find out if that includes Texas).

But a few other points that may be worth noting:

1. The news reports say the accident happened "around 5:30 pm" on Saturday. In Texas, quail can be hunted until 30 minutes after sunset. Sunset on Saturday, in Corpus Christi, was at 6:18, which means they were legal until 6:48. The "around" is suspicious.

2. The news reports say that after Whittington (left) had gotten off his shot and went looking for his bird, Cheney and the other hunter went to another spot where they saw a covey of quail. Texas quail might be different from Iowa quail, but in Iowa when a shotgun goes off, every quail within earshot flutters away. The story doesn't make sense.

3. None of the stories have commented on the fact that they were "road hunting", or hunting from a car. That is just about the lowest kind of low-rent, dishonorable kind of hunting there is (the phrase "road hunting" is often used synonymously with "poaching"). When I was growing up in Iowa, I went pheasant or quail hunting on scores of occasions with my Dad and others. We never would have hunted from a vehicle and it was an insult to even suggest that someone might. It was considered dangerous and declasse, as it was too great an advantage for the hunter to be "fair". It most states, including Texas, it is also illegal:

"It is unlawful to hunt from or by means of motor-driven vehicles and land conveyances or aircraft of any kind except paraplegics and single or double amputees of legs may hunt from stationary motor-driven vehicles or land conveyances."

However, Texas exempts private property owners from the prohibition when they are on their own land and Cheney was with the property owner on his ranch. But it is still really tacky.

4. Hunting quail in Texas requires an "Upland game bird stamp", which costs $7. This is a relatively new requirement, but I'll bet Cheney didn't have one.

5. The spin is that Whittington "came up from behind the Vice President", implying that he snuck up on him or was somehow partially responsible because Cheney didn't know he was there. When hunting, it is bad form to walk in front of someone's gun. When given a choice, one would always approach another hunter from behind.

Cheney has gotten negative press in the past for participating in "canned hunts" and a couple of years ago he got really negative press for going on a canned pheasant hunt in Pennsylvania where he got between 70 and 95 birds (depending on which report is to be believed). The typical daily limit in places like Iowa and South Dakota, where we have many more pheasants than Pennsylvania, is 3 or 5 per day and a possession limit of 15 or 20.

To many of our milieu, hunting is hunting is hunting and the distinctions noted above aren't that big of a deal. To hunters, these are important distinctions. Hunting regulations are strictly enforced in most states and every sixpack Joe knows he better abide by them or he'll get in trouble. Most hunters aren't affluent suede vest guys, they are working class guys within a couple of generations of agriculatural roots. The gluttony of shooting 70 pheasant in a day is almost impossible for them to comprehend.

Focusing on the kill rather than the hunt is frowned upon. Killing more than you can eat is frowned upon. Canned hunts and that kind of over-indulgence is for the Rambo hunters, who are not thought highly of by the old-fashioned Izaak Walton league type of guys, like my Dad.

Someone should be asking if Cheney was drinking, if he was properly licensed with his Upland Game Bird Stamp, when (and if) the hunting accident was actually reported to the authorities and if anyone has investigated why the quail in Texas seem to have gone deaf.

Ms. Armstrong claims to have been in the car, but to have witnessed the shooting. If so, that would mean the hunters were fairly close, within eyeshot, which makes it even less likely that Whittington had gotten off a shot at a quail and then there were other quail still waiting around for Cheney to find them. It just does not make sense.  

© 2006 Doug Ireland
Published on Monday, February 13, 2006 by DIreland

Share Recommend | Keep | Reply | Mark as Last Read | Read Replies (2)

To: SiouxPal who wrote (58098)2/13/2006 3:53:27 PM
From: Tom Clarke   of 237924
 
Watch it! Cheney'll spray your ass...

Share Recommend | Keep | Reply | Mark as Last Read | Read Replies (1)

To: stockman_scott who wrote (58093)2/13/2006 3:56:43 PM
From: geode00   of 237924
 
It's nice when you own the customer.

Share Recommend | Keep | Reply | Mark as Last Read | Read Replies (1)

From: redfish2/13/2006 3:57:20 PM
   of 237924
 
Crazy Dick Cheney shoots first and asks questions later.

Share Recommend | Keep | Reply | Mark as Last Read
Previous 10 | Next 10 

Copyright © 1995-2013 Knight Sac Media. All rights reserved.