China appreciated the fact that the ROK recognized China as a full market economy, Wen said. China-ROK trade volume has increased by 26 times since the two countries forged diplomatic ties in 1992, to 130 billion dollars in 2006.

"The close trade ties between China and the ROK are based on the principles of equality, mutual benefit and complementarity," Wen said. Wen cited a target set by Chinese President Hu Jintao and ROK President Roh Moon-hyun of trade worth 200 billion U.S. dollars by 2012.

The target was set by Hu and Roh during their meetings in 2005 and 2006.

Hu and Roh also agreed on five investment and trade liberalization measures and defined 12 key areas of cooperation. "As a result of economic globalization, China-ROK trade ties have entered a new era, requiring us to expand cooperation, improve quality and cope with challenges together," Wen said.

Wen urged the two countries to work more closely on energy preservation, environmental protection, high-tech and information industry.

Wen also proposed the two countries step up consultations in the framework of the World Trade Organization, the Asia-Pacific Economic Cooperation forum and other international mechanisms.

Wen's two-day visit coincides with the China-ROK Exchange Year, which includes 47 China-sponsored exchange programs.

Wen will unveil the exchange year with ROK leaders in Seoul. "I believe the exchange year will promote cultural exchanges between the two countries," Wen said.

On the six-party talks aimed at resolving the Korean Peninsula nuclear issue, Wen said the relevant parties should consult further so that a peace mechanism can be established on the peninsula.

In response to a question about the unification of the Korean Peninsula, Wen said it would be up to the ROK and the Democratic People's Republic of Korea (DPRK) to resolve the issue "independently and peacefully."

We hope the ROK and the DPRK will develop mutual trust and mend ties through negotiation and dialogue. This is a pre-requisite for independent and peaceful unification, Wen said. "The Chinese government will continue to play a positive role in this regard."

Wen will visit the ROK at the invitation of ROK President Roh Moon-hyun.

A class action lawsuit has been filed against Coast Financial Holdings Inc.[ticker: CFHI], the parent company of Coast Bank of Florida, on behalf of purchasers of the bank’s publicly traded securities.

The complaint alleges that defendants violated the federal securities laws by issuing materially false and misleading statements in press releases and filings with the Securities and Exchange Commission.

According to the complaint, Bradenton, Fla.-based Coast Financial partnered with Construction Compliance Inc. (CCI) to lend money to borrowers who would use the money to construct homes in Southwest Florida.

The lawsuit accuses the banking company of hiding the facts about its relationship with CCI and the true risks associated with the real estate market.

Last month, Washington's State Senate passed a domestic partnership bill, but that state's governor has indicated more enthusiasm about signing it into law.

In throwing out the case's class-action status, the appeals panel also erased the plaintiffs' ability to allege that defendants Merrill Lynch & Co., Credit Suisse First Boston and Barclay's were primary participants in fraud that helped fuel Enron's failure in December 2001.

When U.S. District Judge Melinda Harmon granted class-action status last year, her ruling included that the plaintiffs could argue that the banks were primary participants rather than bit players. If a jury agreed, they could be held liable for their own actions as well as everyone else deemed to be involved.

Such a finding could have led to a multibillion-dollar judgment in excess of the $7.3 billion in settlements already reached — the bulk of which came from banking titans J.P. Morgan Chase, Citigroup and the Canadian Imperial Bank of Commerce.

The appeals panel ruled that Harmon erred in giving plaintiffs that much latitude, saying the deals the banks conducted with Enron "at most aided and abetted Enron's deceit."

The Securities and Exchange Commission can pursue aiders and abettors, but civil securities litigation can only pursue primary violators.

The plaintiffs countered in today's filing that the banks were at the epicenter of fraud, cooking up financial structures and schemes to help Enron doctor its financial statements.

Spokesmen for all three banks, which have consistently denied the plaintiffs' allegations, declined comment today.

The Department's Antitrust Division filed a civil antitrust lawsuit today in U.S. District Court in Washington, D.C. to block the proposed transaction. At the same time, the Department filed a proposed consent decree that, if approved by the court, would resolve the lawsuit and the Department's competitive concerns.

"Without the divestitures required by the Department, purchasers of ready mix concrete, concrete block and aggregate in these areas of Florida and Arizona, including state departments of transportation, would likely have faced higher prices if the transaction is completed. The Department's action will ensure that these customers will continue to receive the benefits of competition,"said Thomas O. Barnett, Assistant Attorney General for the Department's Antitrust Division.

Ready mix concrete is a building material used in large construction projects including buildings, highways, bridges, tunnels, and other projects. Concrete block is a building material used in the construction of residential and commercial structures. Aggregate is crushed stone and gravel produced at quarries, mines, or gravel pits that is used in, among other things, the production of ready mix concrete, concrete block, and asphalt.

The Department concluded that the deal would have resulted in increased prices for ready mix concrete sold to customers handling state Department of Transportation projects and other large building projects in the metropolitan areas of Fort Walton Beach/Panama City/Pensacola, Jacksonville, Orlando, Tampa/St. Petersburg, and Fort Myers/Naples, Fla., and the areas of Flagstaff and Tucson, Ariz. In Flagstaff, Rinker and Cemex are the only two competitors capable of supplying ready mix concrete for these large projects, and in the other areas in which divestitures are being required there are only one or two firms in addition to Cemex and Rinker that are capable of serving large projects.

The Department also said that the acquisition also would have resulted in an increase in prices for concrete block for a significant number of customers in the metropolitan areas of Tampa/St. Petersburg and Fort Myers/Naples, Fla., where Cemex and Rinker account for more than 60 percent of concrete block sales.

Finally, the Department said that the acquisition would have resulted in increased prices for aggregate to a significant number of customers in the Tucson, Ariz., area where Cemex and Rinker are among a small number of firms capable of supplying aggregates meeting state Department of Transportation specifications.

On Oct. 27, 2006, Cemex announced its intention to acquire Rinker through a hostile cash tender offer. The offer was due to expire on March 30, 2007, but Cemex extended it until April 27, 2007.

Under the terms of the proposed consent decree, once Cemex obtains control of Rinker, Cemex must divest certain ready mix concrete assets to a single buyer in each of the areas of competitive concern. The terms of the proposed consent decree also require the divestiture of all of Rinker's concrete block-related assets in the Tampa/St. Petersburg and Fort Myers/Naples areas. Cemex must divest two aggregate plants in the Tucson, Ariz., area to the same acquirer that purchases the two ready mix plants to be divested at the same locations. Under the consent decree, the Department's Antitrust Division must approve the buyer of all of the divested assets.

Cemex, headquartered in Nuevo León, Mexico, produces and distributes cement, ready mix concrete, aggregate, concrete block, concrete pipe, and related building materials to customers in more than 50 countries. In 2006, Cemex reported total sales of approximately $24.6 billion. Cemex is the largest United States supplier of ready mix concrete and cement and the seventh largest United States supplier of aggregate. Approximately 25 percent of Cemex's revenues are earned in the U.S. Cemex operates in the U.S. through its wholly-owned subsidiary, Cemex Inc., which is headquartered in Houston.

Rinker, headquartered in Chatswood, Australia, produces and distributes aggregate, ready mix concrete, cement, concrete block, asphalt, concrete pipe, and other construction materials through its operations in the U.S. and Australia. In 2006, Rinker reported total sales of approximately $4 billion. Rinker is the second largest U.S. supplier of ready mix concrete and the fifth largest U.S. supplier of aggregate. Approximately 80 percent of Rinker's revenues are earned in the U.S. Rinker operates in the U.S. through its subsidiary, Rinker Materials Corporation, which is headquartered in West Palm Beach, Fla.

As required by the Tunney Act, the proposed consent decree, along with the Department's competitive impact statement, will be published in the Federal Register. Any person may submit written comments concerning the proposed decree during a 60-day comment period to Maribeth Petrizzi, Chief, Litigation II Section, Antitrust Division, U.S. Department of Justice, 1401 H Street, N.W., Suite 3000, Washington, D.C. 20530. At the conclusion of the 60-day comment period, the court may enter the final judgment upon a finding that it serves the public interest.

Michael Theodorobeakos of Upper Saddle River, N.J., and two maintenance and insulation companies he co-owned – Monosis Inc. (Monosis) and STU Associates Inc. (STU) – pleaded guilty in U.S. District Court in Manhattan for rigging bids to NYPH and Mount Sinai. Between approximately 2000 and September 2005, NYPH and Mount Sinai purchased substantial quantities of maintenance and insulation services from Theodorobeakos, Monosis, STU and co-conspirators. Theodorobeakos and the co-conspirators attempted to create the appearance that NYPH and Mount Sinai were awarding contracts based on competitive bids, when, in fact, they frequently were not.

"The Antitrust Division is committed to protecting the competitive market for Americans," said Thomas O. Barnett, Assistant Attorney General in charge of the Department's Antitrust Division. "We will continue to apprehend and bring to justice those who rig bids and thereby deprive the public of the benefits afforded by a truly competitive bidding process." As part of the conspiracy, the indictment charges that Theodorobeakos, Monosis, STU and the co-conspirators carried out the conspiracy by:

Designating which company would submit the low bid and which company would submit a higher, complementary bid;

Creating the illusion of a competitive bidding process by using each other's letterhead to submit high, non-competitive bids; and

Providing and being aware of kickbacks to co-conspirators in order to frustrate and subvert the competitive bidding policies of NYPH and Mount Sinai.

The bid rigging crime with which Theodorobeakos is charged carries a maximum penalty of 10 years in prison, three years of supervised release, and a $1 million fine for an individual. Monosis and STU face a maximum fine of $100 million. The maximum fine may be increased to twice the gain derived from the crime or twice the loss suffered by the victim of the crime, if either of those amounts is greater than the statutory maximum fine.

This charge arose from an ongoing federal antitrust investigation of fraud, bribery, tax-related offenses and bidding irregularities in the award of maintenance and service contracts to the engineering departments of Mount Sinai and NYPH. The investigation is being conducted by the Antitrust Division's New York Field Office with the assistance of the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) and the Internal Revenue Service Criminal Investigation.

The ACLU points out the Boy Scouts require members to swear an oath to "do my duty to God and my country."

The court ruled Wednesday, however, the ACLU did not show standing to bring the lawsuit.

Peter Ferrara, general counsel of the American Civil Rights Union explained the ACLU could complain about the policy to Congress or the president, but it "had no business bringing a lawsuit over it and asking the courts to step in."

The ACRU is a non-partisan legal policy organization launched in 1998 that says it is "dedicated to defending all the rights enumerated in the Bill of Rights and the 14th Amendment."

The Defense Department, which sees holding the event at the fort as a boon to military recruitment, is expressly authorized to host the event by a federal statute enacted by Congress, Ferrara points out.

Seven Presidents have attended and spoken at the jamboree, beginning with Franklin Roosevelt in 1937. President Bush spoke at the 2005 event, attended by more than 40,000 scouts. The next jamboree is scheduled for 2010 to coincide with the 100th anniversary of the Boy Scouts of America.

As WND reported in 2005, 90 members of Congress filed a federal appeals court brief declaring support for the Defense Department's sponsorship of the jamboree.

The brief asserted the Defense Department's support comes in the form of "non-religious supplies and services."

"The military's rental of forklifts and trucks, transportation and military equipment, restoration of Fort A.P. Hill after the Jamboree, and provision of other secular services is clearly 'neutral and nonideological,'" the brief said. "The only possible message that the military's aid can be viewed as conveying is that patriotism, self-reliance, physical fitness and support of the military are positive things."

Also in 2005, then-Senate Majority Leader Bill Frist, R-Tenn., introduced legislation to make sure the Boy Scouts can use government facilities for gatherings, meetings and events.

In 2004, the Pentagon settled a lawsuit by telling military bases around the world not to become direct sponsors of Boy Scout troops or Cub Scout dens. Military personnel can now sponsor Boy Scout groups only in their civilian capacity.

As WND reported, the threat of lawsuits by the ACLU has forced the BSA to pull the charters of thousands of scouting units from public schools.