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.

Strategies & Market Trends : Anthony @ Equity Investigations, Dear Anthony, -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Pluvia who wrote (76711)	5/26/2002 9:48:28 AM
From: Mad2	Respond to of 122087

Here's a interesting twist....;?) mad2 The Associated Press The materials in the AP file were compiled by The Associated Press. These materials may not be republished without the express written consent of The Associated Press. May 25, 2002, Saturday, BC cycle SECTION: Domestic News LENGTH: 353 words HEADLINE: Judge "disregards" prosecutor's suggestion accused swindler knew Sept. 11 attacks were coming BYLINE: By SETH HETTENA, Associated Press Writer DATELINE: SAN DIEGO BODY: A federal judge said he would disregard a prosecutor's suggestion that an Egyptian-born financial analyst charged in a nationwide stock swindle may have known about the Sept. 11 terrorist attacks and tried to profit from them. Amr I. "Tony" Elgindy telephoned his broker on Sept. 10 and asked him to liquidate his children's $300,000 trust account, Assistant U.S. Attorney Ken Breen said Friday at Elgindy's detention hearing. "He made a comment predicting the market would drop to 3,000" at a time when the Dow Jones stock index was at 9,600, Breen said. "Perhaps Mr. Elgindy had pre-knowledge of the Sept. 11 attacks. Instead of trying to report it, he tried to profit from it." Breen made his accusations as prosecutors tried to convince the judge that Elgindy was a flight risk and should be denied bail. Magistrate Judge John Houston said he was going to "disregard" the suggestion that Elgindy had anything to do with the terror attacks. Elgindy, 34, of Encinitas, was ordered held without bond on charges of racketeering, extortion and obstruction of justice. Elgindy did not speak during the hourlong hearing. His attorney, Jeanne Knight, said Elgindy did call his broker to make a trade, but the timing was coincidental and the market had been dropping for months. The broker was unable to liquidate the trust account until Sept. 18, she added. "It seems like the government, for lack of factual evidence, has decided to smear my client with terrorist innuendoes," Knight said. "This is smacking of racial profiling." Elgindy, one of five defendants in the case, was arrested May 22 on an indictment issued by a grand jury in New York. In exchange for money, two FBI agents used confidential databases to provide Elgindy and other co-conspirators with information on publicly traded companies, the indictment said. Elgindy allegedly spread negative information about the companies on his Web site and to subscribers of his e-mail newsletter, InsideTruth.com, while betting that the companies' stock would go down. The charges carry a maximum penalty of 65 years in prison. LOAD-DATE: May 26, 2002

To: Pluvia who wrote (76711)	5/26/2002 9:53:40 AM
From: Edscharp	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 122087

Pluvia, Your post, whether intentionally or not, seemingly portrays an innocent man enduring hell out of all proportion to his sins. But, there is a much better analogy to Elgindy's situation. I would compare Elgindy to the irritating guy who goes to the zoo and teases the lions by sticking his hand into the cage. Well, we all feel pretty bad for the guy when he finally loses his hand, but then again who was to blame for his tragedy? The lion? Elgindy tempted fate. He stuck his hand into the cage once too often. He (and his followers) irritated and defamed, he hurt company officers that deserved criticism as well as innocent officers and their families who didn't deserve it. He helped create injustice for others without regard for consequences. He was indiscriminate. Perhaps he is being punished more than is deserved. But, then again who's to blame?

To: Pluvia who wrote (76711)	5/26/2002 12:06:46 PM
From: Kevin Podsiadlik	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 122087

Do you think he extorted shares from these scam CEO's? absolutely. Really. Tell me one thing, why exactly would he do this? Why extort something that's worthless? Especially when it would have the effect of exposing him to the tax burden immediately rather than perhaps years down the road? Demanding these shares would only seem to make it sound like he's admitting the company really isn't a scam after all. It just sounds so exactly like what every stock tout either believes shorts really want or wants others to believe they want. If you know something for a fact to the contrary I stand ready to be corrected, but the concept just doesn't seem to stand up to logic. I mean after all, how many times did Tony refer to a stock as a "never cover"?

To: Pluvia who wrote (76711)	5/26/2002 2:48:49 PM
From: Jorj X Mckie	Respond to of 122087

Gotta agree with you on this. Despite my many criticisms of Anthony in the past, the "terrorist" label is a pretty blatant attempt to smear him. I once asked Anthony why he would have to resort to the tactics he did if his information was so good. Now I am asking myself the same questions about the govt's case. I am certain that this thread will be scrutinized thoroughly. There are multiple predictions on this thread of the Dow going to 2500-3000 in the months prior to 9/11. Where I suspect that many of the charges against Anthony are rooted in truth, I am convinced that the attempt to associate him with terrorism is a crock of shit. Reading the articles yesterday was amazing. His "associates" are being described as "lieutenants". Another attempt to change the connotation or relationships.

To: Pluvia who wrote (76711)	5/26/2002 5:24:05 PM
From: pilapir	Respond to of 122087

Good post, PLUV Nice to see a bit of SOBERNESS in the midst of all this MADNESS and GRANDSTANDING. BTW, an old Hebrew saying I once heard.. "We have a tendency to SCREW our friends, cuz they love us and will forgive us - and take care of our enemies, cuz they hate us and can cause us harm" Ironic, eh ? SELAH ;-)

To: Pluvia who wrote (76711)	5/26/2002 6:03:19 PM
From: SiouxPal	Respond to of 122087

Hey Pluv- I thought you were a wild man till I found Tony. Guess you gotta take the reins now and help us expose the scumbuckets. Think I'll follow your site for some time. Ya got any good'ns fer moi? Thank you in advan$e.

To: Pluvia who wrote (76711)	5/26/2002 6:23:37 PM
From: Nazbuster	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 122087

re: elgindy screwed me. he screwed floyd, he screwed bear... Since you've accused Tony of "screwing you" and he can't respond, care to clarify the details rather than just throw out the accusation? Are you referring to the time he kicked you off the site for not retracting and apologizing for a very hurtful thing you said to him when he was facing the Texas hearing? He viewed you as a friend at that time and clearly pointed out that your comment was hurtful. He gave you an opportunity to retract. When you persisted, you were booted. Why did you come back onto the site if you were so screwed by Tony? I find it revealing that you were the 1st to take a jab at him when the Texas thing came up and were the 1st to call him a liar when this one came up. I recall Floyd was chastized for going commercial with his research. I don't fully grasp or care about the reasons, but Tony was not thrilled about that. Is that the "screwing" you're referring to with Floyd? As far as Bear goes, I only know that he was frustrated and angry that A@P was dragging his feet over refunding fees to Bear's girlfriend at the time when she realized that she had been paying full fare when entitled to 1/2 fees as a founding member. When the subject came up on the site, Tony stated he didn't like being strong-armed by Bear and would refund in due course or give a credit, but wanted to act on the merit and not have it viewed as responding to Bear's demands. The friend could have negotiated it all herself but Bear took it upon himself. Personally, I think a refund should have been issued immediately upon request, but that's just my opinion. As I understand it, a credit was given and I've seen that person on the chat room since. So, do us a favor and provide some facts to back up your comments about Tony being a liar and having screwed you. The others can jump in and tell their own stories. I'm not disputing or supporting your claim, but think it's rather unfair to inflame the situation with such accusations when Tony is not here to defend himself.

To: Pluvia who wrote (76711)	5/26/2002 6:24:01 PM
From: PartyTime	Respond to of 122087

This all seems like bad karma at its best, don't ya think?

To: Pluvia who wrote (76711)	5/26/2002 7:55:40 PM
From: mmmary	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 122087

pluvia, being called a terrorist in jail is as bad as being called a child molestor, if you get my drift. If someone wanted to get rid of Tony, they could just call him a party to 911, throw him in jail and let the inmates do the rest. I believe the 911 charge is to help their case in regard to RICO so they can take his assets so he can't defend himself; to call him a flight risk so he can't get bail to work on his case or raise funds, to make him look guilty before he even gets to trial in the eyes of a jury, to frighten him with potential physical abuse by the inmates, to keep organizations like the ACLU who is against forfeiture from helping him because of the 911 label, to frighten all his friends and members so they'll turn against him...basically it's a way to screw him over before he gets a chance to prove his case. I also think that the FBI is trying to make up for not doing enough about 911 ahead of time by going after anyone who may or may not have anything to do with 911. They need to look like they're doing something. I just want to see him get a fair trial. Right now it doesn't look like that will be happening.

To: Pluvia who wrote (76711)	5/27/2002 6:09:31 PM
From: Buckey	Respond to of 122087

I am 220 post behind here and He is in jail because he is accussed of doing some bad things but that terrorist thing is way way off base. Year he said the markets would go down - He said that all the time. He was generally a bear. That one is very remote. The other stuff looks bad and if he did it he deserves what the courts take from him and what they give him. GREED consumed him before and possibly again but I will let the courts decide that