From: Gary S. Gevisser
Sent: Wednesday, December 27, 2006 10:14 AM PT
To: James Glanz - New York Times
Cc: rest;
Subject: FW: FW: ...YOU SNOOZE YOU LOOSE...---...NULL
You
snooze you lose.
You
have exactly 60 seconds before I begin more spotlighting of your "poor behavior" on The
Internet!
Ps
– you are also now on notice that Starbucks are guilty of “SHAREHOLDER FRAUD”
as well as the heinous crime of “sucking
up” to the tyrant anti-trust violating Kuwaiti and Saudi Royal family by
going along with their Kuwaiti business partner who has threatened to pull the
plug on the share price of Starbuck and those they have co-opted-corrupted like
Peets Tea and Coffee whose growth is not
dependant upon Starbucks continuing to open up some 5 shops a week in the
Middle East outside of course of Israel.
Not
to mention, however, that given Starbucks “command and control” position over
the harvesting of coffee beans throughout the world the likes of weak-kneed
Peets feel forced to “kowtow” and keep their big mouths shut, at least that is
the position of Peets’ senior executives who have surely been informed by their
legal counsels just like you that they now have a very SIGNIFICANT “disclosure”
problem on their hands.
Can
you imagine how invigorated “slave wage” paid employees of companies like PEET
must now feel as they realize it is just a question of time before their
co-opted-corrupted executives “bite the dust” replaced by fearless people who
now know exactly how to bankrupt Starbucks well before Armageddon.
Such
individuals can reach me at this email address.
[Word
count 236]
-----Original Message-----
From: Gary S. Gevisser [mailto:gevisser@sbcglobal.net]
Sent: Wednesday, December 27, 2006 5:56 AM
To: 'James Glanz'
Subject: RE: FW: NULL
Did you get my response from yesterday?
-----Original Message-----
From: James Glanz [mailto:glanz@nytimes.com]
Sent: Tuesday, December 26, 2006 4:17 AM
To: gevisser@sbcglobal.net
Subject: Re: FW: NULL
certainly interested in whatever you'd like to discuss.
of course,
hard information rather than a viewpoint is really our
stock in trade.
just let me know and thanks. jg
At 07:06 AM 12/26/2006, you wrote:
>would you like more information on why this police
station raid distracts
>from the goal to avoid peace "at all cost"
and not think it is an
>"extremist's" point of view but someone
very knowledgeable about the
>middle east conflict?