Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

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.

Technology Stocks : Solucorp Industries (SLUP - OTCBB) -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: aauhaa who wrote (2982)	11/6/1999 11:40:00 AM
From: hawkeye	Respond to of 3679

BE ADVISED:THE TOTALLY UNOFFICIAL CENSOR OF THE SI SLUPPIE NATION ADVISES THAT YOU MODIFY THE FOLLOWING WORDS IN YOUR POST: "blackened" -- recommend -- "traditional hot Cajun style" "poisinous" --- "that which has been recognized by the medical community as having been the cause of serious injury and even fatal reactions when ingested" "stinky"---------"unpleasant to the olfactory senses, that which gives off a highly unpleasant aroma"

To: aauhaa who wrote (2982)	11/6/1999 12:30:00 PM
From: hawkeye	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 3679

hawkeye thanks the Cairman of the SEC for his statement!!! Hi aauhaa, Glad to see you back. The MBS process is indeed an elegantly simple solution to a major environmental hazard!! hawkeye thanks the Chairman of the SI Sluppie Nation's Science Education Commission (SEC), for his cogent statement. Your post was very informative. I've been invested in SLUP for years and never before have I heard such an easily understandable explanation of the MBS process. "the heavy metal compounds are immobilized" -- could you further explain the nature of the immobilized heavy metals compounds as they remain at the remediated site?? Thanks, hawkeye (not Hawkeye) PS: I have been looking for a cheap source of perfumed, flame-resistant/fireproof stationery for the SEC and all citizens of the SI Sluppie Nation (Sluppies).

To: aauhaa who wrote (2982)	11/6/1999 1:41:00 PM
From: hawkeye	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 3679

hawkeye again thanks the Chairman of the SEC* for the light that he brings to this subject. Message 11831312 Message 11830781 *SI Sluppie Nation's Science Education Commission (SEC)

To: aauhaa who wrote (2982)	11/6/1999 2:11:00 PM
From: hawkeye	Respond to of 3679

Did ya'h hear the one about the bill-o-rights?? United States Constitution A document that embodies the fundamental laws and principles by which the United States is governed. It was drafted by the Constitutional Convention and later supplemented by the Bill of Rights and other amendments. The roots of the Bill of Rights - the first ten amendments to the U.S. Constitution - lie deep in Anglo-American history. In 1215 England's King John, under pressure from rebellious barons, put his seal to Magna Carta, WHICH PROTECTED SUBJECTS AGAINST ROYAL ABUSE OF POWER. Among Magna Carta's more important provisions are its requirement that proceedings and prosecutions be according to "the law of the land" - the forerunner of "DUE PROCESS OF LAW" - and A BAN ON THE, sale, denial, or DELAY OF JUSTICE.* "Irving Brant, The Bill of Rights: Its Origin and Meaning (1965); Robert A. Rutland, The Birth of the Bill of Rights, 1776-1791 (1955) Patrick Henry (1736-1799), leader and orator in the American Revolution. He demanded that the Constitution be amended to protect the liberties that the people had won by breaking free of the British Empire. In speech after speech he denounced the absence of a bill of rights in the document, arguing that the supposed checks and balances between the branches of government, stressed by people like Madison were "specious" and "imaginary" protection, mere "contrivances." His arguments and those of Samuel Adams and other Antifederalists were persuasive. Madison soon introduced in the new Congress the constitutional amendments that became the Bill of Rights.* Robert D. Meade, Patrick Henry, 2 vols. (1957, 1969) "It seems to us that Congress, in weighing the public interest against the burden imposed upon private parties, has concluded that 10 days is sufficient for gathering necessary evidence."* * MR. CHIEF JUSTCE REHNQUIST speaking on the SEC's 10-day suspension authority in SEC v. Samuel Sloan (http://www.ishius.com/sec.htm ) "What a revolting development this is!!!!" **William Bendix, The Life of Riley, 1957 SLUPPIES HAVE RIGHTS TOO!!! aclu.org