Quick little detail I found on Ned Price's father Martin Lewis Price, since it's slow: if you go to this page and scroll down a little, you'll find that he made his money by founding "Royal Optical":

https://threadreaderapp.com/thread/948282878152060935.html

Actually, it underwent several name changes. Most of the articles I saw called it Royal International Optical. For instance, I found this xml outline of a WSJ article from '96:

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

http://svn.dridan.com/sandpit/QA/trecdata/datacollection/wsj/wsj8_096

</TEXT>

</DOC>

<DOC>

<DOCNOWSJ880208-0123 </DOCNO>

<HLBuchanan-Led Group Weighs Bid for Royal International Optical </HL>

<SO</SO>

<CORIO </CO>

<INERN TNM </IN>

<DATELINEWASHINGTON </DATELINE>

<TEXT>

An investor group led by Edward S. Buchanan, a Brockton, Mass., banker, said it met with several investment banking firms to discuss a possible tender offer for, or a sale or restructuring of, Royal International Optical Corp.

In a Securities and Exchange Commission filing, the group – which has an 18.3% stake in the eyewear retailer – also said it plans to hire a Texas counsel to review the legality of amendments to the company's recently adopted shareholder rights plan.

According to the filing, Mr. Buchanan has requested to Royal management that he and another member of his group be appointed to the company's board.

Mr. Buchanan said he also told management that his group plans to consider calling a special shareholders meeting to rescind the shareholder rights plan, asking to review the company's records and soliciting proxies.

In the past, the group has said it considered Royal's shares undervalued and would seek ways to maximize the value.

As previously reported, Martin L. Price, a director and holder of 13.1% of the company's stock, has said he might explore a possible merger or sale transaction involving the company.

The filing also said the group is concerned that a board member, Elliott Shane, a principal of one of the company's major suppliers, might make it hard for the board to act "impartially."

Mr. Shane owns Shane-Michael Optical Co., which supplies eyeglass frames to Royal.

In Dallas, Gene Schanbaum, Royal's president, said the eyewear retailer wouldn't comment on the SEC filing.

According to the filing, the group holds 1.3 million Royal common shares, including 43,700 purchased Dec. 23 to Jan. 6 for $8.375 to $12 each.

In New York Stock Exchange composite trading Friday, Royal shares closed at $12.375, up 67.5 cents.

For the nine months ended Dec. 31, earnings more than doubled from a year earlier to $3.3 million, or 48 cents a share, as revenue rose 12%, to $70.2 million.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Also, Edward S. Buchanan "in 1997 was convicted of defrauding the Massachusetts Bank and Trust Company while he served as the bank’s president."

https://www.bizjournals.com/boston/news/2012/01/06/luxury-cars-seized-from-former-bank-pres.html

It struck me as odd that a guy from Dallas would name something "Royal". What also struck me as odd was the first letters in each word: RIO; one of the Rothschild's longest held companies is Rio Tinto, and one of their investment arms is called RIT Capital Partners. you see a lot of "RI's" in Rothschild stuff. Of course, with the word "Royal" you start to think of other possibilities as well–like the House of Saud.

I don't have much of a background in business, so I'm finding it difficult to reconcile the idea that Ned Price's dad was a "founder" of Royal International Optical, and the history of the company that I've read here:

https://www.referenceforbusiness.com/history2/47/U-S-Vision-Inc.html

Maybe some other anons will have more luck.

Couple of links from the Dept. of Homeland Security's home page. This is another good one to bookmark and check periodically.

There's also this page: (from Sept. 5)

https://www.dhs.gov/news/2018/09/05/secretary-nielsen-remarks-rethinking-homeland-security-age-disruption

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Introduction

Good morning everyone. Thank you, Frank, for that kind introduction, and a big thank you to GW for hosting us here today.

I would also like to take a moment to thank the current and former DHS employees joining us today, as well as those who are hard at work across the country, keeping the American people safe.

Let’s give them a round of applause.

Roadmap

Today, I will describe five major changes in the threat landscape that are requiring us to comprehensively rethink homeland security.

I will explain how we are building resilience into everything we do, preparing our frontline defenders to protect America in a new age, and responding to these evolving threats.

A Dark Cloud

Next week will mark an important anniversary: 17 years since the 9/11 attacks.

We are now many years from the pivotal moment that gave us a permanent mission, but we will not let time nor space dull our memories or weaken our resolve. Nor can we afford to, especially with new storm clouds forming on the horizon.

In the months prior to 9/11, then-CIA Director George Tenet said that the system was “blinking red.” We heard enough chatter to know that danger was coming. We just didn’t know when or where.

My colleague Dan Coats, the Director of National Intelligence, recently said the system is “blinking red” once again. His concern is our nation’s digital infrastructure.

He is right. Our digital lives are in danger like never before.

But it’s more than that. We are witnessing historic changes across the entire threat landscape. We can see the winds blowing and hear the thunder drawing closer once again.

The balance of power that has characterized the international system for decades has been corroding. America’s unipolar moment is at risk. Power vacuums are springing up across the globe and are quickly filled by hostile nation-states, terrorists, and transnational criminals.

They all share a common goal: they want to disrupt our way of life—and many are inciting chaos, instability, and violence.

At the same time, the pace of innovation, our hyperconnectivity, and our digital dependence have opened cracks in our defenses, creating new opportunities and new vectors through which these nefarious actors can strike us.

This is a volatile combination. The result is a world where threats are more numerous, more widely distributed, highly networked, increasingly adaptive, and incredibly difficult to root out.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

…it goes on from there. Lots of 'coincidences'.