SEC sends three letters to Daily FT Editor

Mettasena wrote:WHEN CAREFULLY ANALYSED:

Surprising to note that on third letter dated 20 June 2012 SEC Chairman Thilak Karunaratne's 'SIGNATURE IS DIFFERENT?'

K.Haputantri wrote:Well done Dr. TK. "Prostitution" in so called business pages of new papers need to be exposed and punished. We expect more action on those beggers who live on bribes from manipulaters. We salute you sir for the GOOD work done.

thighrokker wrote:

Mettasena wrote:WHEN CAREFULLY ANALYSED:

Surprising to note that on third letter dated 20 June 2012 SEC Chairman Thilak Karunaratne's 'SIGNATURE IS DIFFERENT?'

And SEC asks for our trust?

opfdo wrote:

thighrokker wrote:

Mettasena wrote:WHEN CAREFULLY ANALYSED:

Surprising to note that on third letter dated 20 June 2012 SEC Chairman Thilak Karunaratne's 'SIGNATURE IS DIFFERENT?'

And SEC asks for our trust?

it seems someone has signed on behalf of him & forgot to write "for", or he is having two or more sigs

hariesha wrote:

opfdo wrote:

thighrokker wrote:

Mettasena wrote:WHEN CAREFULLY ANALYSED:

Surprising to note that on third letter dated 20 June 2012 SEC Chairman Thilak Karunaratne's 'SIGNATURE IS DIFFERENT?'

And SEC asks for our trust?

it seems someone has signed on behalf of him & forgot to write "for", or he is having two or more sigs

We can't verify the signature here as these are scanned documents. So any gimmick is possible. If the signatures are different in the original documents, then FT should publish those in the FT itself, without publishing in a forum like this. It seem to be Daily FT editor has proven his unprofessional , biased and bone less attitude again and again.
1. He has leaked a letter he received from the Capital Market Regulator.
2. He is using an investor’s forum to highlight the signature differences and discredit the head of Capital Market Regulator, where he could have use his own newspaper.
I think more deep investigations should carry out to find out any involvement by Daily FT on share manipulations.

hariesha wrote:

opfdo wrote:

thighrokker wrote:

Mettasena wrote:WHEN CAREFULLY ANALYSED:

Surprising to note that on third letter dated 20 June 2012 SEC Chairman Thilak Karunaratne's 'SIGNATURE IS DIFFERENT?'

And SEC asks for our trust?

it seems someone has signed on behalf of him & forgot to write "for", or he is having two or more sigs

We can't verify the signature here as these are scanned documents. So any gimmick is possible. If the signatures are different in the original documents, then FT should publish those in the FT itself, without publishing in a forum like this. It seem to be Daily FT editor has proven his unprofessional , biased and bone less attitude again and again.
1. He has leaked a letter he received from the Capital Market Regulator.
2. He is using an investor’s forum to highlight the signature differences and discredit the head of Capital Market Regulator, where he could have use his own newspaper.
I think more deep investigations should carry out to find out any involvement by Daily FT on share manipulations.

opfdo wrote:

hariesha wrote:

opfdo wrote:

thighrokker wrote:

Mettasena wrote:WHEN CAREFULLY ANALYSED:

Surprising to note that on third letter dated 20 June 2012 SEC Chairman Thilak Karunaratne's 'SIGNATURE IS DIFFERENT?'

And SEC asks for our trust?

it seems someone has signed on behalf of him & forgot to write "for", or he is having two or more sigs

We can't verify the signature here as these are scanned documents. So any gimmick is possible. If the signatures are different in the original documents, then FT should publish those in the FT itself, without publishing in a forum like this. It seem to be Daily FT editor has proven his unprofessional , biased and bone less attitude again and again.
1. He has leaked a letter he received from the Capital Market Regulator.
2. He is using an investor’s forum to highlight the signature differences and discredit the head of Capital Market Regulator, where he could have use his own newspaper.
I think more deep investigations should carry out to find out any involvement by Daily FT on share manipulations.

the letter dated 20th not leaked by FT, it is published on the sec web,
http://www.sec.gov.lk/?p=4003&lang=en

opfdo wrote:

opfdo wrote:

hariesha wrote:

opfdo wrote:

thighrokker wrote:

Mettasena wrote:WHEN CAREFULLY ANALYSED:

Surprising to note that on third letter dated 20 June 2012 SEC Chairman Thilak Karunaratne's 'SIGNATURE IS DIFFERENT?'

And SEC asks for our trust?

it seems someone has signed on behalf of him & forgot to write "for", or he is having two or more sigs

We can't verify the signature here as these are scanned documents. So any gimmick is possible. If the signatures are different in the original documents, then FT should publish those in the FT itself, without publishing in a forum like this. It seem to be Daily FT editor has proven his unprofessional , biased and bone less attitude again and again.
1. He has leaked a letter he received from the Capital Market Regulator.
2. He is using an investor’s forum to highlight the signature differences and discredit the head of Capital Market Regulator, where he could have use his own newspaper.
I think more deep investigations should carry out to find out any involvement by Daily FT on share manipulations.

the letter dated 20th not leaked by FT, it is published on the sec web,
http://www.sec.gov.lk/?p=4003&lang=en

I just cross check the SEC annual report, & found that it is not his Sig, (letter 20th) & other letters not published in the SEC also
http://www.sec.gov.lk/?p=3958&lang=en

For me it seems someone has singed on be half of him. It is normally happening on urgent matter, when boss out of the office by having his authority.

GMNet wrote:If SEC wants to be transparent and publish their letters in their official website that's fine with all of us and we all appreciate the transparency.

But where are the so called letters they have sent to other manipulators, front runners and wrongdoers... Show in the official website the letters they have sent to the people they have found guilty and charged and suspended ???

Why are they only showing letter sent to media. This not natural justice!!!

GMNet wrote:If SEC wants to be transparent and publish their letters in their official website that's fine with all of us and we all appreciate the transparency.

But where are the so called letters they have sent to other manipulators, front runners and wrongdoers... Show in the official website the letters they have sent to the people they have found guilty and charged and suspended ???

Why are they only showing letter sent to media. This not natural justice!!!

Whitebull wrote:

opfdo wrote:

opfdo wrote:

hariesha wrote:

opfdo wrote:

thighrokker wrote:

Mettasena wrote:WHEN CAREFULLY ANALYSED:

Surprising to note that on third letter dated 20 June 2012 SEC Chairman Thilak Karunaratne's 'SIGNATURE IS DIFFERENT?'

And SEC asks for our trust?

it seems someone has signed on behalf of him & forgot to write "for", or he is having two or more sigs

We can't verify the signature here as these are scanned documents. So any gimmick is possible. If the signatures are different in the original documents, then FT should publish those in the FT itself, without publishing in a forum like this. It seem to be Daily FT editor has proven his unprofessional , biased and bone less attitude again and again.
1. He has leaked a letter he received from the Capital Market Regulator.
2. He is using an investor’s forum to highlight the signature differences and discredit the head of Capital Market Regulator, where he could have use his own newspaper.
I think more deep investigations should carry out to find out any involvement by Daily FT on share manipulations.

the letter dated 20th not leaked by FT, it is published on the sec web,
http://www.sec.gov.lk/?p=4003&lang=en

I just cross check the SEC annual report, & found that it is not his Sig, (letter 20th) & other letters not published in the SEC also
http://www.sec.gov.lk/?p=3958&lang=en

For me it seems someone has singed on be half of him. It is normally happening on urgent matter, when boss out of the office by having his authority.

Other letters are also published.Just check the press releases on 28th.So it is not leaked from FT.

kamal9perera wrote:Hey guys just saw this.

One advice, the best thing is to not comment on things that you don’t know. In this case, professional English letter writing.

In the last letter dated 20th June, the SEC Chairman has addressed the Editor of Daily FT as ‘Dear Sir” and it is very official. So the full signature is there.

The other two letters (Dated 28th May) he has addressed the Editor as Dear Nisthar; it is a friendly letter though it is official. The Chairman has put his name there.

I appreciate some of the comments published here. We should support the SEC in its efforts against corrupt investors and media guys.

GMNet wrote:

But where are the so called letters they have sent to other manipulators, front runners and wrongdoers... Show in the official website the letters they have sent to the people they have found guilty and charged and suspended ???
Why are they only showing letter sent to media. This not natural justice!!!