are phantom shares behind the price fall?

I feel it may be timely to bring to posters attention the following two articles on the ravages created by unregulated short selling in US equity markets.
They are eye opening.

Although I have quoted from both articles,I strongly recommend they be read in full.

The first is;
http://www.deepcapture.com/wp-content/uploads2009/10/story-of-dendreon.pdf

The second is;

"Sheared by the Shorts.How Short sellers fleece Investors"
by Ellen Brown J.D

[This is a post on her 'Web of Debt'blog dated 29 Sep,2011.]

Firstly,the Dendreon article details how "a network of market miscreants that [included]disreputable financial analysts,prominent journalists,some of America's best known hedge fund managers[and Mafia connexions]made Dendreon,a company with promising treatment for prostate cancer,"one of the most manipulated stocks on NASDAQ"....hedge funds churned the stock.."And with every burst of good news the company.. faced waves upon waves of naked short selling,hedge funds illegally selling millions of shares that[did]not exist to flood the market and drive down the stock price.Along with the phantom stock,people seeking to diminish Dendreon{read Unilife?]..deployed false financial research,biased media,bogus class action lawsuits,internet bashers,dubious science,and other familiar weapons.."

Deja vu anyone?

The Brown article gives an example of an individual buying the total stock of a small company -1 million shares-and put them in his"sock" drawer.Over the next two trading days -60 million "shares" in that company were traded.
How can it happen?
Today,shares are just numbers on a computer screen and can be traded in nano seconds.Easy to fake a market.

Brown goes on to explain how shares are rented out to shorters,sometimes for a hefty premium-the actual owners getting nothing of course."Worse,they can be seriously harmed by the practice.They bought the stock because they believed in the company and wanted to see its stock thrive,not dive.Their shares are used to bet against their own interests.."
There is another problem with short selling in that the short seller "is allowed to vote the shares at shareholder meetings"
Since many shareholders "don't bother with sending in their proxies..short sellers can swing the vote in a direction that hurts the interests of those with a real stake in the corporation.."

Such as voting for a low ball takeover?

I realise now why we get phone calls from Unilife to see if we're voting our shares at meetings.

I have been delinquent in the past.

No longer.

I had puzzled over why US regulatory authorities are so lax about this rampant stock market theft.The Dendreon article explains it somewhat.

Money talks-the 'Golden Rule'

The political class in the US, as in Australia,no doubt is prone to favour those who contribute large 'donations'to their election campaigns etc.

I find it all very disturbing.

I am now of the opinion that
[a] Alan Shortall should come out swinging against the shorters and their antics, using the copious amounts of evidence available and should seek the support of the Governor of Pennsylvania in denouncing this activity.

[b]Seriously consider de-listing from the NASDAQ and re-listing on a UK or European Stock Exchange where I believe short selling is more vigorously regulated.

I feel there may be no other option because if these 'shorters'-I have another term in mind-are allowed to continue unhindered and unchecked,it wont make any difference how many deals are signed in future,the share price will still be subject to being trashed at the whim of these rogue elements.

donnybrook