To: goldsheet who wrote (65481 ) 3/13/2001 6:01:07 AM From: d:oug Respond to of 116815 [why be an apologist] russwinter (to) Bob Johnson (to) russwinter ... the list of companies I've listed ... we like many (if not most) of the same names ... so why be an apologist for the others? ... [why] bash firms whose business practices you do not like ? ... do not have correct view of thinking of hedging as a crime, believing in manipulation, and hating Barrick. ... do not feel all the pain and have not developed the hate that seems to be a requirement to join the gold investors club (along with being anti-hedging and believing in manipulation) Bob, Your elaborate reply was short, but very elegant. Also, very much the opposite of what you wish to stand for. My motive here is not for a personal attack from me to you, but only to perform a service to inform readers of your words, that to follow your thoughts into action will create, rather than eliminate, that which you feel hate for. So that your reply can be viewed in whole without my cut & paste, it is copied below. But first, Raging Bull has "found" the wonderfullness of Gata.ragingbull.lycos.com Please imagine that i have placed many abatises between us, as its for your own well-being to continue in error rather than for i to identify your wayward course to combat the evil you encounter. > so why be an apologist for the others? Why relentlessly bash firms whose business practices you do not like ? Direct your energies on the positive aspects of the firms you listed. Sorry I do not have correct view of thinking of hedging as a crime, believing in manipulation, and hating Barrick. Barrick was a perfect trading vehicle for me over the last three years. The only thing I need to apology for is making money in 2000, 1999, and 1998. I have not had a loss in gold stocks since 1997, so I do not feel all the pain and have not developed the hate that seems to be a requirement to join the gold investors club (along with being anti-hedging and believing in manipulation)