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: Edscharp who wrote (80165)	9/14/2002 9:23:39 PM
From: mmmary	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 122087

Ed, our posts, readers opinions here don't matter what really matters is not what a few readers here think but what Judge Dearie thinks. What matters is how Tony's attorney presents his case in court. It doesn't matter how I present what I believe to be his case here. The members of SI won't be making up the jury box. I don't even have any of the evidence for the other charges except the public accusation in regard to 911. I couldn't present a case if I wanted to. I personally believe that the governments case is probably not that strong because they felt they had to throw in bogus 911 charges. I'm pretty sure they KNEW he had nothing to do with 911. The government knew no one shorted 911. The government probably or at least should have read his thread and seen what he felt about 911. The goverment knew he was trying to help them look for funny trades. The government knew he didn't liquidated any accounts or add any short positions. At least the government is now saying he had nothing to do with 911. Will they be backing down from teh charges in the indictment as well? We shall see.

To: Edscharp who wrote (80165)	9/15/2002 9:34:37 PM
From: StockDung	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 122087

Ed is a long term ASTN bagholder. If he had listen to Auric, mmmary and you long ago instead of being so pompous, maybe he could have saved himself some embarrassment. I guess he did not want to disclose his ASTN losses to the thread. This is personal with Ed, if he thinks justice is being served because he made a bad investment, he's as bad as DaiNT (the guy caught in two of Tom Hughes Econ-nect's halts). Notice as ASTN drops, Ed's insults pick up. ED, there a particular stock scam that Elgindy exposed which you had lost money on? Is this the reason you seem so bitter? Message 15470635 Message 15470742 siliconinvestor.com Message 15473229 I may have to double down on my investment. Message 16145736 Message 16185395 To:Sir Auric Goldfinger who wrote (4032) From: Edscharp Wednesday, Aug 8, 2001 4:26 PM Auric, Do you and Mary know each other? The two most vitriolic people to post on this board in the past two years have been you and Mary and both of you seem to have personal motives against Ashton or it's supporters. Strange coincidence...no? Mary, yes I think the share price will go up. I'm willing to take a greater than normal risk in exchange for the possibility of greater than normal profits. Message 16187496 To:mst2000 who wrote (4055) From: Edscharp Thursday, Aug 9, 2001 6:26 PM MST forensic adj - Of or employed in debate or argument; rhetorical. In Truthseeker's biography he lists his occupation/profession as "Forensic INTERNET Research Specialist" which would certainly explain his desire to take a few cheap shots. I guess this makes Steve and Mary Forensic INTERNET Research Specialists as well. This thread seems to be the official meeting place. Hey, come to think of it whatever happened to Dr. Suess? If he arrives we can have a nice poker game. To:Edscharp who wrote (4066) From: Sir Auric Goldfinger Friday, Aug 10, 2001 12:37 PM Guru is never a word I have used. But I will say that you are surely a piker if you are a) posting on the ASTN thread contrary to my views about this greased anchor b) you cannot own up to the fact that ASTN is circling the drain. Have a good day, Jr. Message 16199987 Please take a look at the original posts here on the board. Look at sir auric. He called this from the start. Truthseeker also. Also look at mst debating him all the way with his same bull which never came true. Who has more credibility? Sir Auric and TheTruthseeker. Message 16200900 To:mmmary who wrote (4131) From: Edscharp Monday, Aug 27, 2001 8:34 AM Mary, since no one on this board cares to speak with you anymore and since you seem to have a LOT of time on your hands I just want you to know that I am willing to assume the titular title of "Head Ashton Hyper" and thus be the recipient of your abuse accordingly. Please bring Auric with you. I've long enjoyed the both of you. You would make a fine couple. Go Fred! Regards, Ed S. You are however a very attractive woman. Cherish it as you grow older. Message 16758003 Ed really is a creep! JMHO