- * To help professionals in the various fields of financial services become more successful through the suitable and ethical use of the consultative sales process.
* To widen the scope of financial, economic and political information available to the professional financial advisor and financial product distributor.
* To skeptically examine and, where necessary, attack the flaccid institutions that financial journalism and regulation have become.
* To liberate oppressed knowledge, as well as revive long forgotten truth.
* To provide insurance and investment analysis uninhibited by political or regulatory constraint.
* To facilitate information's unending quest for freedom.
Top Gun Producers' method: Pseudonymous Speech...
Anonymity is a shield from the tyranny of the majority. It thus exemplifies the purpose behind the bill of rights, and of the first amendment in particular: To protect unpopular individuals from retaliation -- and their ideas from suppression -- at the hand of an intolerant society.
"The right to remain anonymous may be abused when it shields fraudulent conduct. But political speech by its nature will sometimes have unpalatable consequences, and, in general, our society accords greater weight to the value of free speech than to the dangers of its misuse." - McIntyre v. Ohio Elections Commission 514 U.S. 334 (1995) Justice Stevens writing for the majority
Though often maligned (typically by those frustrated by an inability to engage in ad hominem attacks) anonymous speech has a long and storied history in the United States. Used by the likes of Mark Twain (aka Samuel Langhorne Clemens) to criticize common ignorance, and perhaps most famously by Alexander Hamilton, James Madison and John Jay (aka Publius) to write the federalist papers, we think ourselves in good company in using one or another nom de plume. Particularly in light of an emerging trend against vocalizing public dissent in the United States, we believe in the critical importance of anonymity and its role in dissident speech. Like the Economist magazine, we also believe that keeping authorship anonymous moves the focus of discussion to the content of speech and away from the speaker - as it should be. We believe not only that you should be comfortable with anonymous speech in such an environment, but that you should be suspicious of any speech that isn't.