• Quick note - the problem with Youtube videos not embedding on the forum appears to have been fixed, thanks to ZiprHead. If you do still see problems let me know.

Loose Change - Part IV

Status
Not open for further replies.
Found this little tidbit (albeit by someone listed as Anonymous) as a reply to th e"George Washington" Blog on 9/11:

The link to the blog articl follows the quote...

Anonymous said...

Stratesec was briefly one of my clients. My employment was with an insurance broker and my role for Stratesec was to broker for them a surety bond line of credit from an insurance company. A surety bond is a third-party guarantee of a legal obligation - no connection or relationship to bonds in the sense of stocks and bonds. In this instance, the main purpose of the surety bond line of credit was to provide tender (bid) security and peformance and payment bonds to guarantee contracts for security systems work.

Stratesec came to my employer because the insurance company, Frontier, was broke. In a nutshell, Frontier had had too many contractors go broke and it cost them too much money in their claims from project owners.

Stratesec's first name was Securecom. Another firm had that name, so it was changed. Securecom was a spin-off from a security company named Burns. KuwAm, a firm controlled by Mishal Youself Soud Al Sabah, a member of the Kuwaiti royal family, initially controlled Securecom directly and indirectly with 90% of shares. Other shareholders included President Geo. Bush's brother, Marvin Bush; Wirt Walker III (a cousin); Lt. General James Abrahamson USAF and Emmit J. McHenry, chairman of NetCom. McHenry's firm, Network Solutions Inc. (NSI), acquired by VeriSign in 2000 for $15 billion, developed the internet domain registry on a grant from the National Science Foundation. Abrahamson was appointed by Reagan to head the Strategic Defense Initiative or "Star Wars" program and I believe that he may have commanded the Air Force in the Persian Gulf War.

Albeit closely held, Securecom / Stratesec was a public company. 10-K and 10-Q documents are thus available online and they include much of this background information.

KuwAm repeatedly pumped additional capital into Stratesec to the tune of about $20 million to cover repeated annual losses. The official story is that Stratesec's original business plan was to increase revenue faster than the profit curve in order to rapidly acquire market share and thereby become a dominant national security firm. Actually, the term "systems integrator" is more appropriate.

A contract to install systems at the WTC towers was identified as a major problem. Contract losses reportedly resulted from problems in developing custom software that they subcontracted to a group of Berkely professors. Its President, blamed for the losses, left when that chapter was closed.

I discussed the WTC contract with Barry McDaniels, Stratesec's last President. He told me that acquisition of the WTC contract had been negotiated by Ron Thomas, his predecessor. McDaniels said that all of the people involved in the matter were gone, that the contract was poorly documented and that, in consequence, nobody understood it well enough to discuss it, so it just wasn't worth delving into. He said that Thomas did not delegate adequately but instead carried a lot of information concerning the contract in his head and that he wasn't available to discuss it either. Thomas had left with a golden parachute that included shares and and a consulting contract for which he had to do virtually nothing. This conversation with McDaniels was in 2000.

I suggest that an appropriate area of research might be to obtain 1) a copy of the contract to determine precisely what sort of equipment and software Stratesec was to install and 2) obtain a copy of the subcontract with the Berkley professors.

Another of Stratesec's major contracts at the time was installing security systems at TVA facilities. Maybe a dam or two will blow up next time.


Very interesting...

http://georgewashington.blogspot.com/2005/11/how-could-they-plant-bombs-in-world.html

TAM
 
The loosers have made a shocking discovery, these may be my last days. Apparently the evil folks who brought you 9/11 are going to blow up Chicago Thursday. If I die in the inferno, I hope all you here avenge my death!

I'd leave town, but well, you know, traffic and the price of gas and all...

eta: another looser thread on the subject.

Usual poor math skills from the Loosers; 3/11/04 was not 911 days after 9/11/01, it was 912 days, and 3/11/04 plus 911 days is not 9/7/06, it's 9/8/06.
 
Now my new all time favorite spoof film...that was f&*King Hillarious. I almost wet myself...no really...no...but still.

Awesome job, who ever made it...

MOOSE CHANGE ROCKS!!!!

:crowded: :jaw-dropp :blush: :( :p :eek: (and one more to make chuck happy):cool:
 
Hell yeah...

When I turn in a production to Discovery or History Channel, we turn in a "production book" Usually a 3 ring binder containing: signed releases from the subjects on camera (not necessary for news)

Signed releases for the location -- (if I've used a museum etc. as a background.)

Listing of all music, if it is not original to the production, then performance rights, publisher rights, and copyright information, along with the letter of clearance.

Same for stock footage, and stills.

Copy of an insurance policy called "errors and omissions" in case I screwed up any of the stuff above, and the broadcaster gets sued.

Failing to do that, subjects the film maker AND the broadcaster to copyright violations and the penalty is $10k PER instance.

Lawyers are your partners these days as a film maker. And film school doesn't cover that part enough because it's dull.

Film making is a BUSINESS. Business first, art second. You might get a grant to make a film, but Kodak gets cash up front.

(want to know how to make a small fortune as a documentary maker? Start with a large one. . . )

That's EXACTLY what I'm talking about. How in the hell are these guys getting away with licensing their stuff? I know that other countries are a little different in their copyright laws, but...I mean - correct me if I'm wrong - but I'm pretty sure that very first helicopter shot in LC is swiped directly from one of those HBO docs, not to mention the Frenchie footage, the stuff taken from CNN, Google earth screenshots (those are all public domain now??), I just don't get it...
 
Jason Bermas, Dylan Avery and Killtown are hosting some show on Republic Network right now.

What a trainwreck.
 
Jason Bermas, Dylan Avery and Killtown are hosting some show on Republic Network right now.

What a trainwreck.

Aha - I'm glad someone else heard part of it, too. I caught only about the last 15 minutes of it and it was pathetic.
 
Here's a new thread at LC that won't last long, nor will the poster, I'm sure:

9/11 "truth"
LordCarbo


There is no 9/11 conspiracy.

What could the government possibly gain from this?

If so many people, so many US citizens, were behind something this huge and deadly, don't you think someone would of let it slip beforehand?

Do you people even consider any of the countertheories? Most of them totally demolish any of these dumb conspiracies.


I hope the government flies planes into all of your homes.

http://s15.invisionfree.com/Loose_Change_Forum/index.php?showtopic=12398&hl=
 
MarkyX, could you post that picture of a real controlled demolition that's in your 'Frequently Stupid Theories' pdf for Submersible, since he's having trouble with text? I'm not using my own pc at the moment, so I don't have the document handy, but I think it was on about page 34, and it shows evenly spaced 'squibs' half-way or more up the building and it's beginning to collapse from the bottom up.
Great document, by the way.
 
image022up8.jpg


This one?
 
T.A.M., I noticed in a couple of your recent posts (all of which I enjoy reading) you could have used some text formatting buttons in your Quick Reply field (though you found the smilies in your last one so you may have already worked this out - if so, please ignore me).
If you or anyone else is interested, to do this, go to User CP (top of this page), then 'Edit Options' (side left), then down to Miscellaneous Options. In the Message Editor Interface, select Standard (or even Enhanced, though I haven't tried that).
 
Thanks for the info. Seems I already am in that mode.

I have used it as needed. My big problem seems to be around getting quotes put in properly...
 
Seems now one of the biggies, Paul Watson over at prisonplanet is calling for a distancing by all Troofers from the "No Plane/Hollograph Plane" theory. The big question now, is where does this leave the keebler elf lady and Mr. Cloaker? WIll they abandon the theory, or will they take their toys and leave the playground?

http://prisonplanet.com/articles/sep...getheories.htm

Watson has no problem with a kooky CT if it fools enough people. His chief criterion is people not buying the malarkey. If that happens, he suddenly becomes a debunker.
 
Cheers, T.A.M.
The 'Insert Quote' button looks like this:
quote.gif

which is in between the 'Insert Image' and 'Smilies' buttons.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Back
Top Bottom