Tag: Movements and Resistance

Posted on: Sunday, August 30, 2009

Injured soldier feels ‘betrayed’

By William Cole
Advertiser Columnist

Sgt. Kaipo Giltner has been in the Hawai’i Army National Guard for 10 years.

The 28-year-old Hawai’i Kai man deployed to Iraq for a year in 2005, and was set to deploy to Kuwait last fall.

That’s when his service to the nation got complicated – in this case due to injury. Giltner’s battles have since been fought at home with the National Guard as he figures out what to do about a bad back.

Giltner said his Humvee hit a bump on a tank trail Sept. 2 during training at Fort Hood, Texas. He and other Hawai’i soldiers were preparing for the deployment to Kuwait.

Giltner, a 1999 Kaiser High School graduate, said he felt pain shooting down his leg, and numbness.

“He followed protocol” and went to sick call, said Giltner’s wife, Shelly. She was six months pregnant at the time. Kaipo Giltner was sent home and taken off active duty.

The National Guard initiated a special “line of duty” investigation, and Giltner recently got the results.

“They are going back and forth, (but) they are saying that it was a previous injury, and they are not responsible because I didn’t claim it at the time,” he said.

Giltner said he was in a Humvee that was hit by a roadside bomb in Iraq during the 2005 deployment. He had some back pain, “but it was really small and minor,” and Giltner said he didn’t report it. He then went through pre-deployment training in 2008.

“I was fine. I did all the necessary training,” he said. Giltner, who has a disc protrusion, said he should have been kept on active duty so he could receive pay as he pursued medical treatment.

“One doctor told me I might need surgery, so if I go through surgery, I’ll be out of work for a year,” said Giltner, who works part-time as a gate guard at Fort Shafter.

“I feel pretty much betrayed,” he added. “I fight for the country and put my life on the line and when it’s time to take care of me … they can’t do it.”

Lt. Col. Chuck Anthony, a Hawai’i National Guard spokesman, said he is prohibited from discussing specifics of Giltner’s case, which he called “very complicated.” Soldiers often are kept on active duty during injury treatment, he said.

“In most cases, it’s pretty clear cut,” Anthony said. Other cases “can be problematic because it’s not clear in terms off what caused a particular illness or injury (and) whether or not it was a pre-existing condition.”

Reach William Cole at wcole@honoluluadvertiser.com.

Source: http://www.honoluluadvertiser.com/article/20090830/COLUMNISTS32/908300357

Venezuelan “Peace Bases” to Counter U.S. Military Buildup in Colombia with Binational Reconciliation

August 28th 2009, by James Suggett

Mérida, August 28th 2009 (Venezuelanalysis.com) — In a movement to counter the expansion of the United States military presence on Colombian bases, Colombian and Venezuelan civil society organizations and government officials are collaborating to organize spaces of binational reconciliation called “peace bases.”

Local, state, and national elected officials, consuls, immigrant organizations, community councils, and everyday citizens have participated in the founding of Venezuela’s first peace bases this month.

The bases turn public spaces into forums where Colombians and Venezuelans discuss peaceful solutions to the armed conflict in Colombia, which has raged for four decades and continues to affect neighboring Venezuela, Ecuador, Panama, the rest of Latin America, and the United States.

Venezuelan President Hugo Chavez announced earlier this month that the peace bases should provide free medical services and address other pressing needs of the community of Colombian immigrants in Venezuela.

Chavez also said the bases should improve the communication between Venezuelans and Colombians so that Venezuelans learn the about the everyday lives and struggles of Colombians, and Colombians “get to know what is really being said and done here in Venezuela,” as opposed to the negative information and anti-Chavez attacks that are predominant in the Colombian media.

“They have the right to know that they are our brothers and sisters, that we are their friends and that we are not a threat to Colombia,” Chavez said in a nationally televised meeting with his Council of Ministers.

Venezuela’s first peace base was established in the city of Valencia, Carabobo state on August 12th, with the presence of Colombian opposition Senator Piedad Cordoba.

“In Colombia, the problems are not going to go away with more war. There are problems that do not go away by murdering everybody, problems such as poverty,” said Cordoba during the inauguration ceremony for the peace base.

Cordoba said she would invite Ecuadoran society to form peace bases, as well, and request that President Rafael Correa encourage their formation. Ecuador was the victim of a Colombian military air and ground attack on a guerrilla encampment in its territory last year, an event which sparked a regional diplomatic crisis and spurred the Brazil-led initiative of the Union of South American Nations (UNASUR) to form a regional defense council to diffuse potential military conflicts.

This week, peace bases were established in the border states of Zulia and Táchira, the coastal state of Falcón, and the eastern state of Anzoátegui. The Association of Colombians in Venezuela said its peace base in Barcelona, Anzoátegui, plans to use the Barcelona city council as a forum for discussion.

According to the president of the Association of Colombians in Venezuela, Juan Carlos Tanus, the group plans to create as many as seventy peace bases in Venezuela, beginning with a planned twelve peace bases in different stations of the Caracas Metro this coming September 12th.

“The peace bases are going to be the stage for meetings and co-existence, where we will be able to work with the Colombian and Latin American community on the real dimensions of the social and armed conflict that Colombia suffers internally,” Tanus said earlier this month.

On Wednesday, Venezuelan vice Minister of Foreign Relations for Latin America and the Caribbean Francisco Arias Cardenas attended the inauguration of a peace base in the town of Paraguaipoa in the northwestern zone of Zulia state called the Guajira.

According to Arias Cardenas, the base seeks the “integration and union between Colombia and Venezuela, and an end to the internal war in Colombia by way of dialogue.” Both countries’ national anthems were played at the event to symbolize this objective, said the vice minister.

On Thursday, Arias Cardenas attended the inauguration of another peace base on the cross-border bridge which connects the two nations in the city of Ureña, Táchira state. The participants extended a sheet along the bridge on which they collected signatures against the Colombia-U.S. military deal, and distributed pamphlets advocating against the military buildup.

In Falcón state, National Assembly Legislator Alberto Castelar participated in the establishment of a peace base on Thursday. Castelar said, “Peace is the principal objective of these bases, which are mobile spaces on which forums, workshops, and meetings will take place.”

In the end of July, a deal between the U.S. and Colombia to allow the U.S. to place thousands more troops and expand surveillance operations on as many as seven Colombian bases was made public.

Venezuela, describing the deal as a threat to the region, broke off and then restored diplomatic relations with Colombia, and has since vowed to replace its commerce with its second largest trading partner by expanding trade with other countries in Latin America and abroad.

This century, the U.S. has granted more than $5.5 billion in mostly military aid to Colombia under the auspices of the so-called ‘war on drugs’ and counter-insurgency.

Source: http://www.venezuelanalysis.com/news/4750

The following message and document was posted by Philippines scholar and activist Roland Simbulan:

Enclosed is the Affidavit of Philippine Navy Lt.SG Nancy Gadian on the direct involvement of U.S. military forces in combat operations in Mindanao. It was presented  before the Legislative Oversight Committee on the Visiting Forces Agreement, Philippine Senate, Aug. 27, 2009. Navy Lt. SG Gadian had earlier exposed anomalies in the handling of funds for the Balikatan exercises for which she was an operational officer of the Armed Forces of the Philippines.

Nancy Gadian-affidavit

US Troops in Philippines: America Pursues Expansionism, Protects Economic Interests

PUBLISHED ON August 28, 2009 AT 5:14 PM

In her revelations of the violations committed by US troops while on Philippine soil, former Navy officer Nancy Gadian also affirmed what has always been the core of US expansionism: using its military power to exploit the wealth and resources of another country. This was the core strategy in practically all the wars America had fought. Its so-called “war on terror” in the Philippines is no exception.

By ALEXANDER MARTIN REMOLLINO
Bulatlat.com

MANILA – When former Navy Lt. Senior Grade Mary Nancy Gadian gave a press conference in Quezon City on Wednesday to expose the wrongdoings of US troops stationed in the Philippines, she mentioned, among other things, the economic agenda behind America’ continued presence in the country.

“The US is after the natural resources of the Philippines,” she said, adding that the Philippines has a “strategic location” in relation to the rest of Southeast Asia.

Gadian only affirmed what has always been the core of US expansionism: using its military power to exploit the wealth and resources of another country. This was the core strategy in practically all the wars America had fought – from Iraq to Afghanistan to the Philippines, where it had maintained military bases.

When these Philippine bases were removed by the people’s will in 1991, it did not signify the end of US military intervention in the Philippines. After the attacks in the US on Sept. 11, Washington found a convenient justification for sending its troops here – the so-called war on terror.

The US forces started trickling in since 2002 and have never left. As Gadian revealed during her press briefing, the Americans have put up their own facilities and structures in Mindanao, their unhampered access and presence allowing them not only to actively participate in a local conflict, in violation of the Constitution, but also to pursue what Gadian called “economic surveillance.”

Gadian is the same Navy officer who, last May, exposed the alleged malversation of P46 million for the US-Philippines Balikatan military exercises in 2007. Her latest exposé came days after The New York Times reported on the announcement of US Defense Secretary Robert Gates that a 600-member elite force of US troops deployed in the Philippines – particularly in Mindanao – since 2002 are here to stay.

These troops, who are stationed in what Gadian described as “permanent structures,” comprise the Joint Special Operations Task Force-Philippines (JSOTF-P), which was established by the US Special Operations Command Pacific (Socpac). It began its work when Socpac’s Joint Task Force (JTF) 510 deployed to the Philippines. Based on an item on GlobalSecurity.org, JTF 510 was deployed to the Philippines “to support Operation Enduring Freedom.”

Operation Enduring Freedom is the official name given to the US government’s military response to the Sept. 11 attacks. It entails a series of “anti-terrorism” activities in Afghanistan, the Philippines, the Horn of Africa, Trans-Sahara, and Pakinsi Gorge.

Based on a fact sheet posted on its website, the JSOTF-P maintains its headquarters within the AFP’s Camp Navarro, which is located in Zamboanga City. It also has three regional task forces throughout Mindanao, working with the AFP: Task Force Archipelago, also based at Camp Navarro; Task Force Mindanao, based at Camp Sionco, Maguindanao; and Task Force Sulu, based at Camp Bautista, Jolo Island, Sulu. A number of JSOTF-P personnel also work in Manila, coordinating activities with the US Embassy and the AFP General Headquarters.

Aside from these facilities, according to Gadian, the JSOTF-P also maintains an office at Edwin Andrews Air Base, which is also located in Zamboanga City, as well as facilities in Camp Malagutay, Zamboanga City; the Philippine Naval Station in Batu-Bato, Panglima Sugala, Tawi-Tawi; and Camp General Bautista in Busbus, Jolo, Sulu.

Art. XVIII, Sec. 25 of the Philippine Constitution provides that:

“After the expiration in 1991 of the Agreement between the Republic of the Philippines and the United States of America concerning military bases, foreign military bases, troops, or facilities shall not be allowed in the Philippines except under a treaty duly concurred in by the Senate and, when the Congress so requires, ratified by a majority of the votes cast by the people in a national referendum held for that purpose, and recognized as a treaty by the other contracting State.”

Government officials supporting the continued stay of US troops in the Philippines have claimed that the Visiting Forces Agreement (VFA) allows their prolonged presence in the country. The VFA, however, is not recognized by the US government as a treaty.

Economic Interests

Zamboanga City, the largest city of Zamboanga del Sur, is “home” to the Zamboanga Freeport Authority, where US corporations like Multi-Products Distribution and International Power Distributor are among the investors. Zamboanga del Sur is also a major mining area in Mindanao, aside from being rich in marine and aquaculture resources.

The nearby Maguindanao is one of the provinces straddled by Liguasan Marsh, together with North Cotabato and Sultan Kudarat. Covering 288,000 hectares, Liguasan Marsh is rich in oil and natural gas reserves. Former Autonomous Region in Muslim Mindanao (ARMM) Governor Nur Misuari, citing estimates by American oil engineers, has said total earnings from the natural gas reserves of Liguasan Marsh could amount to $580 billion.

As if to underscore the importance of control of the marsh, it had been the site of numerous clashes between the government and the Moro Islamic Liberation Front (MILF), a separatist group whose avowed objective is to ensure that the rich natural resources in Moro areas should be enjoyed first by the Moro people.

Sulu is currently the site of oil exploration operations involving several foreign companies, including a US corporation. In 2005, the Department of Energy (DoE) awarded Service Contract 56 to Australia’s BHP Billiton Petroleum PTY Ltd., Amerada Hess Ltd., Unocal Sulu Ltd., and Sandakan Oil II LCC. Amerada Hess Ltd. is a unit of Hess Ltd., a US-based oil and gas exploration company. Based on a 2005 news item published by the Philippine Information Agency (PIA), Service Contract 56 covers some 8,620 hectares offshore Sulu Sea, an area described as “one of the most prospective areas for oil and gas exploration as indicated by the previous drilling activities conducted in the area.”

Basilan and Sulu are both part of what is known as the Sulu Archipelago, together with Tawi-Tawi.

The economic agenda behind US military presence in the Philippines, however, is not limited to the Philippines.

“By and large, the most important value (of the Philippines for the US) is its strategic location: we are at a critical area where north of the Philippines and south of the Philippines you have the critical flow of sea lanes for US (and) Japanese vessels – both military and commercial – coming from the Middle East, bringing in oil supplies and other raw materials all the way from Africa to the Pacific Ocean,” said Roland Simbulan, a professor of development studies at the University of the Philippines (UP) in Manila and an expert on US foreign policy.

“Of course, anyone who controls this area, this gateway where the Philippines is located, will control the flow of trade in this area. And next to that, of course, is the location of the Philippines facing China, because in the medium-term and long-term basis, the United States still looks at China as a potential rival within the next 15 years, (if) its military prowess (catches) up with the economic power that it has right now,” Simbulan told Bulatlat in a recent interview.

Rey Claro Casambre, who heads the Philippine chapter of the International League of Peoples’ Struggle (ILPS-Philippines), affirmed this in a separate interview. “The Philippines is strategically located on the Strait of Malacca, the trade route through which half of world trade passes,” Casambre said. “The US earns several billions of dollars from trade there. And a lot of oil… is transported (there) on oil tankers. Anyone who controls that area controls trade.”

Litany of Offenses

Apart from the economic agenda behind US military presence in the Philippines, Gadian – who was assigned for several years in Mindanao – gave a litany of various offenses committed by US troops in the country.

She said she had received several reports indicating that the US troops in Mindanao were “embedded” within Philippine military units conducting field operations in the area, something that the Constitution disallows.

This statement of Gadian bolsters allegations that US troops have been sighted in encounter sites in Mindanao – most notably during an attack by combined Army and Navy forces in Barangay (village) Ipil, Maimbung, Sulu on Feb. 4, 2008. This attack claimed the lives of eight non-combatants, including an Army soldier on vacation.

The US troops in the Philippines, Gadian said, also join actual operations against “insurgent” or “terrorist” groups. “They help in ‘neutralizing’ high-profile targets,” she said.

Aside from these, Gadian said, US troops in the Philippines routinely conduct intelligence operations through the use of “special intelligence equipment,” and participate in the planning of combat operations.

“Intelligence is part of combat operations,” said Gadian, who claimed to have had direct dealings with some of the American soldiers. “When you use special intelligence equipment, you (are getting to know a certain) target and where he is. Why would you conduct intelligence (work) if not for combat operations? Intelligence is not separate from combat.”

“Conducting intelligence operations and participation in the planning of combat operations are unconstitutional,” said Gadian’s legal counsel, Evalyn Ursua, who also spoke at the Aug. 26 press conference. “Prohibition on foreign military presence means foreign troops should have nothing to do within Philippine territory.”

But that is not all, Gadian said. She revealed that the US troops also conduct various operations and other activities without the knowledge of, let alone clearance from, their Filipino counterparts.

Gadian also said she was a direct witness to several incidents which showed not only the “arrogance” of US soldiers and their civilian employees, but also their “abusive” treatment of Filipinos. “They don’t even call us by their names – they merely make gestures with their fingers, as if they are calling dogs,” she said.

Another issue linked to US troops’ presence in the Philippines, Gadian said, is the exploitation of women. She said she was personally a witness to several instances when US soldiers picked up prostituted women, or when prostituted women went to the soldiers’ hotel rooms. It has reached a point, she said, where the women would even go to Camp Navarro to provide their “services” to the US troops stationed there.

“Small” Benefits

How has the Philippines benefited from the seven-year presence of US troops? Not very much, Gadian said.

Gadian pointed out that the seven-year presence of US troops in Mindanao has not solved the “insurgency” and “terrorist” problems in the area.

“There has been no end to it because they don’t want to end it,” she said. “So many soldiers have died there, who didn’t have to die if only there was resolve to end the problem.”

Technology-wise, Gadian said, Filipino soldiers learned to use “small pieces of equipment such as sophisticated guns, which the armed forces does not have and does not acquire,” as well as night-vision goggles. Another technological “benefit,” she said, is the opportunity to ride high-powered aircraft. “Filipino soldiers used to only see these in the movies, but now, they get to ride these,” she said.

The government has pointed to the infrastructure projects and medical and dental missions conducted by US troops as benefits from their presence here. For Gadian, however, there is not very much in these to be thankful for. “The government can provide these if only it is serious enough in giving services to the people,” she said. “We don’t need the Americans to do these things.”

Gadian said the VFA should be abrogated. “Since it has always been used as a justification for US troops’ presence in the Philippines, the VFA should be junked so there would be no more justification for their stay,” she said. (Bulatlat.com)

Source: http://www.bulatlat.com/main/2009/08/28/us-troops-in-philippines-america-pursues-expansionism-protects-economic-interests/

Brad Parsons shared this interview with Austal CEO Bob Browning and some choice excerpts that affirm what anti-Superferry activists have said all along:

Bob Browning: Sure, yeah the Hawaii Super Ferry contract really was quite unusual. We were actually helping that company get started and put $30 million of mezzanine debt into the business which then allowed us to contract to build two large catamaran ferries for them. And strategically was important because it allowed us to build our workforce up in Mobile, Alabama which then allowed us to win the Joint High Speed Vessel program which is a very close derivative to that hull form. So while it was unfortunate that Hawaii Super Ferry filed for Chapter 11, it was an unusual thing that we normally wouldn’t do, but it did position us for a much more lucrative contract with the Navy…

Bob Browning: It really was a conscious decision…

See the video of the interview here: http://www.finnewsnetwork.com/archives/finance_news_network12266.html

Austal (ASX:ASB) Annual Results

TRANSCRIPTION OF FINANCE NEWS NETWORK INTERVIEW WITH AUSTAL LTD (ASX:ASB) CEO, BOB BROWNING

Clive Tompkins: Hello Clive Tompkins reporting for the Finance News Network. Joining me for the first time from ship-builder Austal Ltd (ASX:ASB), is CEO Bob Browning. Bob welcome to FNN. You’ve just released your full year results to June 30 with net profit down 82 per cent to $9.2 million on revenue of $500 million, can you explain the result?

Bob Browning: Sure, and it’s important to realise that the impact in our income statement was really some accounting treatments, non-cash write-downs. Our underlying business would have produced about $38.5 million this year which was ahead of analyst expectations but we had the Hawaii Super Ferry write-down and a derivative instrument that we put in place on a multi-ship program that has locked in a big upside for that program going forward from a commercial basis.

Clive Tompkins: Given the substantial hit you took to your bottom-line on the Hawaii Super Ferry contract, are you going to change the way you get paid for similar deals?

Bob Browning: Sure, yeah the Hawaii Super Ferry contract really was quite unusual. We were actually helping that company get started and put $30 million of mezzanine debt into the business which then allowed us to contract to build two large catamaran ferries for them. And strategically was important because it allowed us to build our workforce up in Mobile, Alabama which then allowed us to win the Joint High Speed Vessel program which is a very close derivative to that hull form. So while it was unfortunate that Hawaii Super Ferry filed for Chapter 11, it was an unusual thing that we normally wouldn’t do, but it did position us for a much more lucrative contract with the Navy.

Clive Tompkins: Austal has built a global dominance producing and selling car and passenger fast ferries, but has also been producing a fair number of military vessels, where do you get the bulk of your work from these days?

Bob Browning: Right now it comes primarily from the commercial side of the industry in large catamaran ferries down to passenger ferries. If we fast forward upwards of two years I would expects about two thirds of our income from multi-ship U.S. Navy awards going forward.

Clive Tompkins: And is this a conscious decision, or have you just followed the work flow?

Bob Browning: It really was a conscious decision. We were actually prevented form operating or selling in the United States through some protectionist legislation called the Jones Act, and so the establishment of our facility in Mobile Alabama was designed to allow us to produce ships for that market. We then saw an opportunity with a vessel we produced for a customer in the Canary Islands that we thought an adaptation of that would fit the Navy’s Littoral Combat Ship program and were successful in winning that contract.

Clive Tompkins: The global financial crisis has seen a lot of companies back-peddling, how has Austal been affected?

Bob Browning: It clearly had an impact on our Australian operations with the commercial sales, while the pipeline was quite full, it was taking longer for customers to get the financing that they needed and get to the decision point to actually buy a vessel. So the first half of our fiscal year we had a real trough in the order book. We’re seeing that coming good now, we’ve had three large orders here in calendar year 2009, and clearly the strongest part of our business, the U.S. Navy business, coming forward will take a lot of that volatility out of our business.

Clive Tompkins: So how many months work do you have?

Bob Browning: In the Australian operations we have an order book that will take us out to 2011. In the Navy, because these are multi-ship programs, we’re going to be building vessels just for these two programs for the next eight or nine years.

Clive Tompkins: And what other metrics does a ship-builder monitor in terms of performance?

Bob Browning: If there’s one thing the ship-building industry has its metrics. We measure everything from our cost performance indices, how are we doing against the planned cost for the ship. Schedule performance indices, are we going to deliver the ship on time. Our EBIT margins obviously are very important, do we have the workforce lined up to handle the order book that’s in place, it’s a constant balancing act.

Clive Tompkins: What about margins, are they coming under pressure as government finances are being strained?

Bob Browning: Not so much because of government finances, in fact that’s actually been a more stable piece of our business. The margins of late have come under a bit of pressure because of the first-in-class Littoral Combat Ship that we built. It was a cost plus contract where we earned a fee, but as the cost of the vessel goes up the EBIT margins get squeezed a bit. That’s unique to that one vessel, the vessel’s we build going forward are on a fixed fee contract and are much more predictable in terms of the earnings.

Clive Tompkins: Turning to your work with the U.S. Navy, you’ve just received funding to purchase equipment another two Joint High Speed Vessels. Without actually receiving the contract to build at this stage, how significant is this?

Bob Browning: It’s very significant. It’s a 10 ship program, and so the Navy allowing us to go out and buy the water jets and diesel engines and reduction gears, the big equipment for vessels two and three, is a very clear signal they intend to award those contracts. And so when you add that program up with Littoral Combat Ship program we could be sitting here a year from now and we’ll have $1.5 billion of ships in the order book.

Clive Tompkins: And is this normal to be awarded funding in advance of receiving a contract?

Bob Browning: It’s somewhat unusual. The Navy saw an opportunity to save some money in the cost of this equipment by ordering a bit sooner, more importantly for us it’s a clear signal you know the Navy is not going to order this kind of equipment if they aren’t going to award the rest of the ship. And so we see it as a very significant event in terms of the surety of the next two vessels coming to us.

Clive Tompkins: And have you done work with other Navies?

Bob Browning: We have. We built 14 Armidale Class Patrol Boats for the Royal Australian Navy. We finished the delivery of the last of those vessels up last fiscal year. We have built patrol boats for the likes of Yemen and Kuwait. We are currently building coast guard vessels for the Maltese Coast Guard, and we’ll deliver six patrol boats to the Trinidad Navy as well later this year. So Austal is creating a global awareness in terms of patrol boats in the international market.

Clive Tompkins: And onto your competition. Who are your main competitors?

Bob Browning: Our competition depends upon the type of vessel we’re building, as you can imagine. With the U.S. Navy the only competitor we have there is with Littoral Combat Ship program in which Lockheed Martin is a team that’s building a very different style of vessel. While it’s a competitor we expect the Navy to split that contract and we’ll build probably 25 to 27 of our version of the LCS and Lockheed will build 25 to 27 of their version. When you get to commercial car passenger ferries probably our most significant competitor would be Damen out of the Scandinavian area and Incat in Tasmania actually. So it really varies depending on the whole form that we’re building.

Clive Tompkins: How difficult is it for other ship builders to enter your key markets?

Bob Browning: I think we’ve got a strong barrier to entry into our business, particularly in the United States, there’s no other builder of aluminium vessels in the U.S. of our size. We are the largest in terms of market share for large catamaran fast ferries in the world. And it’s a unique skill building with aluminium. We think it’s going to continue to be a strength for us because the operating costs on these vessels are far less, being a lighter material it takes less power to move them at the same speed.

Clive Tompkins: Last question. Bob where do you see Austral in 12 to 18 months?

Bob Browning: It will be a rapidly growing business. As I mentioned earlier we will have $1.5 billion worth of ships in the order book within a year. But that number is going to continue to grow because the Navy is accelerating their acquisition schedule, it appears to us, in vessels. And so that’s going to translate to a much more stable order book, and we believe the market then will be able to see out beyond 12 months which then translates hopefully to a re-rating of the stock. So we‘re feeling very, very good that this is a big inflection point for the company into the future.

Clive Tompkins: Bob Browning thanks for introducing Austal.

Bob Browning: My pleasure.

Source: http://www.finnewsnetwork.com/archives/finance_news_network12266.html