All My Net Biz

WASHINGTON—Orders for long-lasting U.S.-made goods rose in June, the government reported Thursday, but were below Wall Street expectations and a measure of business spending in the data fell unexpectedly, prompting concern about economic growth.

In another report, the number of new claims for U.S. unemployment benefits fell unexpectedly in the latest week to the lowest in more than two months.

The employment figures did little to sooth investors considering the disappointing durable goods data in a climate of fear that credit could be drying up.

New orders for goods meant to last at least three years rose 1.4 percent in June on an increase in nondefense aircraft. Wall Street economists had been looking for an increase of 1.8 percent.

Within the report, nondefense capital goods orders excluding aircraft — seen as a good gauge of business spending — fell 0.7 percent, well below economists’ expectations for an 0.8 percent gain.

The bond market extended price gains on the data, while equities indexes fell across the board after the open.

The data added to overall concerns about the economy and a worsening climate for deal financing as investors continue to fret that the crisis in the subprime mortgage sector could lead to a sharp reduction in the availability of credit.

“It’s not good, really,” said Michael Metz, chief investment strategist at Oppenheimer & Co. in New York.

“You ex out transportation, it’s certainly a disappointment,” he said, referring to durable goods orders excluding transportation, which fell 0.5 percent. Economists had expected an 0.5 percent gain.

Investors found some minimal solace in the report showing initial jobless claims for state unemployment benefits fell for the third week to 301,000 in the week ended July 21 from an upwardly revised 303,000 the prior week.

That marked the lowest level of weekly initial jobless claims since May 12, and was below expectations for a reading of 310,000.

WASHINGTON (AP) Documents indicate eight congressional leaders were briefed about the Bush administration’s terrorist surveillance program on the eve of its expiration in 2004, contradicting sworn Senate testimony this week by Attorney General Alberto Gonzales.

The documents underscore questions about Gonzales’ credibility as senators consider whether a perjury investigation should be opened into conflicting accounts about the program and a dramatic March 2004 confrontation leading up to its potentially illegal reauthorization.

A Gonzales spokesman maintained Wednesday that the attorney general stands by his testimony.

At a heated Senate Judiciary Committee hearing Tuesday, Gonzales repeatedly testified that the issue at hand was not about the terrorist surveillance program, which allowed the National Security Agency to eavesdrop on suspects in the United States without receiving court approval.

Instead, Gonzales said, the emergency meetings on March 10, 2004, focused on an intelligence program that he would not describe.

Gonzales, who was then serving as counsel to Bush, testified that the White House Situation Room briefing sought to inform congressional leaders about the pending expiration of the unidentified program and Justice Department objections to renew it. Those objections were led by then-Deputy Attorney General Jim Comey, who questioned the program’s legality.

“The dissent related to other intelligence activities,” Gonzales testified at Tuesday’s hearing. “The dissent was not about the terrorist surveillance program.”

“Not the TSP?” responded Sen. Charles Schumer, D-N.Y. “Come on. If you say it’s about other, that implies not. Now say it or not.”

“It was not,” Gonzales answered. “It was about other intelligence activities.”

A four-page memo from the national intelligence director’s office says the White House briefing with the eight lawmakers on March 10, 2004, was about the terror surveillance program, or TSP.

The memo, dated May 17, 2006, and addressed to then-House Speaker Dennis Hastert, details “the classification of the dates, locations, and names of members of Congress who attended briefings on the Terrorist Surveillance Program,” wrote then-Director of National Intelligence John Negroponte.

It shows that the briefing in March 2004 was attended by the Republican and Democratic House and Senate leaders and leading members of both chambers’ intelligence committees, as Gonzales testified.

Schumer called the memo evidence that Gonzales was not truthful in his testimony.

“It seemed clear to just about everyone on the committee that the attorney general was deceiving us when he said the dissent was about other intelligence activities and this memo is even more evidence that helps confirm our suspicions,” Schumer said.

Bush acknowledged the existence of the classified surveillance program in December 2005 after it was revealed by The New York Times. In January, it was put under the authority of the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court for judicial review before any wiretaps were to be approved.

Asked for comment on the documents Wednesday evening, Justice spokesman Brian Roehrkasse said Gonzales “stands by his testimony.”

“The disagreement referenced by Jim Comey in March 2004 was not about the particular intelligence activity that has been publicly described by the president,” Roehrkasse said. “It was about other highly classified intelligence activities that have been briefed to the intelligence committees.”

The disagreement over whether to renew the program led to a dramatic, and highly controversial, confrontation between Gonzales and then-Attorney General John Ashcroft on the night of March 10, 2004.

After briefing the congressional leaders, Gonzales testified that he and then-White House chief of staff Andy Card headed to a Washington hospital room, where a sedated Ashcroft was recovering from surgery. Ashcroft had already turned over his powers as attorney general to Comey.

Comey was in the hospital room as well, and recounted to senators in his own sworn testimony in May that he “thought I just witnessed an effort to take advantage of a very sick man, who did not have the powers of the attorney general because they had been transferred to me.”

Ultimately, Ashcroft sided with Comey, and Gonzales and Card left the hospital after a five- to six-minute conversation.

Gonzales denied that he and Card tried to pressure Ashcroft into approving the program over Comey’s objections.

“We never had any intent to ask anything of him if we did not feel that he was competent,” Gonzales told the Senate panel Tuesday. “At the end of his description of the legal issues, he said, ‘I’m not making this decision. The deputy attorney general is.’ And so Andy Card and I thanked him. We told him that we would continue working with the deputy attorney general and we left.”

Democrats and Republicans alike expressed disbelief at Gonzales’ version of events.

“There’s a discrepancy here in sworn testimony,” Senate Judiciary Chairman Patrick Leahy, D-Vt., said after listening to Gonzales, raising the possibility of a perjury inquiry. “We’re going to have to ask who’s telling the truth, who’s not.”

Sen. Arlen Specter of Pennsylvania, top Republican on the panel, also disregarded Gonzales’ description. “I do not find your testimony credible, candidly,” he told the attorney general.

House and Senate lawmakers who attended the Situation Room briefing are divided on the accuracy of Gonzales’ account of that meeting, which he said concluded by a “consensus in the room from the congressional leadership is that we should continue the activities, at least for now, despite the objections of Mr. Comey.”

Three Democrats Д House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, Senate Intelligence Committee Chairman Jay Rockefeller and former Senate Democratic leader Tom Daschle Д dispute Gonzales’ testimony. Rockefeller called it “untruthful,” and Pelosi spokesman Brendan Daly said the speaker disagreed that it should be continued without Justice Department or FISA court oversight.

On the other hand, former GOP House Intelligence Chairman Porter Goss, “does not recall anyone saying the project must be ended,’ spokeswoman Jennifer Millerwise Dyck said. And former Senate Republican leader Bill Frist stopped short of confirming or denying the meeting’s outcome.

“I recall being briefed with the others about the program and it was stated that Gonzales would visit with Ashcroft in the hospital and that our meeting was part of the administration’s responsibility to discuss with the leadership of Congress,’ Frist said in a statement.

By OLGA PIERCE
UPI Health Business Correspondent
WASHINGTON, May 30 (UPI) — New U.N. guidelines tell doctors to suggest HIV testing, instead of waiting for patients to request it.

Under the guidelines, unveiled Wednesday by the World Health Organization and UNAIDS, healthcare providers everywhere who treat patients at high risk of HIV are advised to suggest testing. But in countries facing a widespread epidemic, they advise doctors to recommend tests for all patients anywhere they seek healthcare.

Organizations fighting AIDS celebrated the guidelines as a step toward identifying the estimated 31 million out of the 39.5 million people living with the disease worldwide who are unaware they are infected. But human rights concerns clouded the announcement.

“We think these new guidelines are extremely important,” said Kevin De Cock, director of HIV and AIDS programs at the WHO.

As we struggle to move toward universal access to testing, treatment and support, HIV diagnosis is an important first step,” he told reporters on a conference call.

People who do not know they have HIV do not receive life-prolonging treatment and counseling to prevent them from spreading the disease to others, De Cock said. When doctors recommend testing, patients are more likely to find out their status.

The catch is that in some countries there have been reports of mandatory testing, breaches of confidentiality and discrimination. If friends and neighbors are informed a patient has HIV, the person could be shunned. If an employer is given that information, the person could be fired.

In those countries, De Cock said, the guidelines call for strong monitoring and enforcement to make sure testing helps people instead of hurting them.

Some human rights organizations, however, are concerned that a wide-scale rollout of testing programs will not take discrimination into account.

“The guidelines are helpful in the sense that countries around the world have been looking to the WHO for guidance,” Joe Amon, director of the HIV/AIDS program at Human Rights Watch, told United Press International. But “we already know in some countries HIV testing is done without good protections.” Violations “happening today are real concerns.”

Human Rights Watch reports document human rights violations involving testing in countries in Asia, Europe and Africa.

Because of the definition of epidemic, the guidelines tell about 50 countries to recommend testing to all patients, Amon said. Those countries will need to be committed to protecting the rights of HIV patients.

Existing resources need to be mobilized to carefully watch testing, and major campaigns should be launched to persuade the public to help people with HIV, instead of hurting them with discrimination, he said.

“More people have to know their status, but just knowing isn’t enough.”

But other advocates say the critical need for testing outweighs other concerns.

“The worst discrimination people with HIV and AIDS face is premature death because of lack of treatment,” said Michael Weinstein, president of the AIDS Healthcare Foundation, a U.S.-based group that provides treatment for the disease domestically and around the world.

One billion people per year need testing, and that will never be possible unless it is incorporated into the general healthcare system, he told UPI. The group practices routine testing at centers in the United States, Uganda and other countries, and that has dramatically increased the testing rate.

“If we knew every infected person today and counseled them not to infect their partners, we would achieve global AIDS control relatively quickly, Weinstein said.

“A majority of people with HIV and AIDS in the world don’t know. You cannot combat AIDS on a global basis without early detection.”

Windowglobal.com is the premier internet forum for select professionals who are looking to enhance and expand their referral network globally. “There is nothing like knowing that a referral can come in at anytime from any part of the world without even knowing the person personally. This is the real referral system and it is working,” said David, client services director.

Houston, TX (http://www.prweb.com/) June 25, 2007 — http://www.windowglobal.com, an online network global resource for select professionals who want to enhance their profitability and network globally, was recently formally launched.

The world has become a global village through the internet with no geographical boundaries. Businesses can now be done in a far less time than it was done 20 years ago. Windowglobal.com was created to fulfill and take the utmost opportunity with these current trends in allowing select professionals to interact worldwide through the Referral program.

http://www.windowglobal.com
Select professionals in the service industry such as real estate professionals, mortgage/loan professionals, attorneys/lawyers, architects, home builders, estate valuers/appraisers, accountants/CPA, stock brokers, insurance practitioners, shipping and haulage practitioners, surveyors, business brokers, employment practitioners, private investigators, security consultants and custom clearing practitioners are brought together on the net without any language barrier.

With http://www.windowglobal.com, participating professionals can locate or find other professionals in a region or country, city or area of the world where they do not personally know someone. These professionals can refer (or accept) business/clients for a negotiated referral fee to (or from) a participating referral member in any part of the world. It is a win-win situation.

This is a membership website with $50 to $100 per year membership fees depending on the membership category. Windowglobal.com does not charge members for their transactions with fellow members or the public. “There is nothing like knowing that a referral can come in at anytime from any part of the world without even knowing the person personally. This is the real referral system and it is working,” said David, client services director.

There are three (3) major reasons why http://www.windowglobal.com is unique:

- Global network referral without language barrier creating sizable potential referral partners.
- Worldwide exposure to fellow professionals and the public.
- Interaction with other people from different parts of the world encouraging mastery of the business with diverse culture.
For additional information, please visit http://www.windowglobal.com

About http://www.windowglobal.com:
Windowglobal.com is owned by Global Referral Network Partners L.P. and is headquartered in the United States. The professional forum was created based upon the vast experience of the founding members of Global Referral Network Partners.

### –>

Wednesday was likely a busy one for many option traders that focus on IBD 100 stocks. With volatile price swings, earnings and increased premiums across-the-board, there were plenty of reasons for considering adjustments and perhaps opening fresh positions as well. In the following, we’ll recap a couple of the more extreme regions of that particular universe.

In front of this evening’s earnings release, Apple () saw a surge in options activity and in its risk premiums. On the day, total volume swelled to more than 600,000 contracts versus its typically brisk 200,000. Further, a Put / Call ratio in conjunction with existing high and firmer implieds during Wednesday’s session suggest bullish bets were being wagered in front of the report.

ATM implieds for August were near 55% with the 140 / 135 Strangle fetching 13 points or $1300 a contract. Hence, on an expiration basis traders would need shares of AAPL either above 153 or below 122 in order to profit. In the after-hours session, the stock is moving to the plus side near $143 in volatile trade. However, with an expected decline in the implieds, the “juice” or Vega component of nearly 0.30 per contract will mean a stronger move is still necessary if any profits in Thursday’s session are going to materialize. If we anticipate a drop in the premiums to the 40% area, the stand alone ‘vol crush’ for the Strangle will be approaching 4.50 points of the 13 point initial debit.

While trading in Apple’s options was impressive, Wednesday’s most unusual activity in percentage terms was Buffalo Wings (). The restaurant operator isn’t scheduled to release its earnings until July 30, but it appears some bullish positioning is taking place in front of the report. While signs of distribution have crept into the picture; the latest being today’s technical attempt at breaking one-month price supports, option traders were most active in the OTM August 45 Calls. Front month implieds spiked by five percentage points to 67% during the session.

No doubt, general market conditions are in part responsible for the increased pump in implieds. But, with more than 2,000 contracts changing hands, existing Open Interest of just 1,407 and daily average volume of just 1,240; demand for protective strategies in lieu of stock look to be more than sufficient evidence. Also active and accounting for nearly as much volume, the OTM September 32.50 Puts look like a ‘cheapy’ bet. While the implieds are theoretically rich, for a 0.60 closing price and three sessions remaining until the report, the logic of using them as the basis for a starter position can be appreciated in conjunction with risk management.

Visit the «www.investors.com» for an extensive list of option-related terms.

The observations provided are not investment advice or a recommendation, the suitability of which is considered the responsibility of the trader.

Copyright 2007 through Optionetics, Inc. All rights reserved. «www.optionetics.com?source=ibdweb» is a Trademark or a registered Trademark of Optionetics, Inc., in the United States and/or in other countries.