Banned.......Replies to the A@P thread. Message Board

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Strategies & Market Trends : Banned.......Replies to the A@P thread.

Public Reply Prvt Reply Mark as Last Read File

Previous 10 Next 10 Previous Next

To: Bill Ulrich who wrote (1802)	1/8/2005 5:27:00 PM
From: Janice Shell	Read Replies (1) of 5425

Good post, Bill. A few more points: Back in 2002 concern about 9/11 was even greater than it is now. Many people were arrested and charged in connection with terrorist acts, some on very flimsy evidence. Does anyone really think the same wouldn't have happened to Tony if they'd found anything even approaching proof? If he were really involved with Al Qaeda (please note correct spelling, Pugs), would he have got bail? Instead, they turned up his connection to Royer and Cleveland, and are prosecuting him for that. Despite the attention the trial is getting on the message boards from people who knew or knew of Tony, in the larger scheme of things it's pretty small potatoes. Why bother if they could nail him for terrorism and try to get more information about terrorist activities from him? Doesn't make any sense at all.

Report TOU Violation

Share This Post

Public Reply Prvt Reply Mark as Last Read File

Previous 10 Next 10 Previous Next