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.

Pastimes : The Justa and Lars Honors Bob Brinker Investment Club Thread -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Justa Werkenstiff who wrote (1411)	9/10/2001 6:04:48 PM
From: Wally Mastroly	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 10065

Justa: Probably about to start 'earnings-warning-season'. Wouldn't be surprised to see a few 'positive' earnings reconfirmations thrown in the mix. Companies could try to mitigate more selling by taking the offense. In this market, you are assumed guilty until you prove yourself innocent <G> See ya round the thread. Wally

To: Justa Werkenstiff who wrote (1411)	9/16/2001 8:53:05 PM
From: Boca_PETE	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 10065

THE STANDARD 'ACT OF WAR' OUT in INSURNACE POLICIES: I'm thinking insurance companies will lose in court if they attempt to avoid paying claims arising from the attacks of this past week by claiming an out under the standard "Act of War" clause in insurance policies. Certainly most agree that last week's attacks on the USA represent an act of TERRORISM since the evidence revealed so far implicates cowardly faceless individuals as having perpetrated the horrors. BUT when I hear statements like "We are at war" and "We will root out the evil doers in the world", the word "CRUSADE" (in the sense of 'War against Poverty' which really meant 'crusade against poverty') comes to mind. I've always thought WARS were usually legally declared by governments and involve conflicts between countries. Although war was never legally declared in the case of Viet Namn, it still represented conflict between countries. Here, no specific countries have taken responsibility for the attacks. And a legal declaration of war could hamper efforts to root out and destroy terrorist cells here and abroad. Moreover, I would think to be characterized as "An Act of War", our country would need to have evidence that the attacks were financed and coordinated by a foreign government. So far from public statements, we hear nothing to this effect. Instead we hear that the "prime suspect" is definitely BinLaden, in individual not formally associated with any government. Any comments ? FWIW, P