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 : Banned.......Replies to the A@P thread. -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Bill Ulrich who wrote (1853)	1/10/2005 9:35:37 AM
From: Louie_al-Arouri	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 5425

He certainly alludes to it with a great deal of innuendo. But let's skip that point for a minute. Let's NOT "skip that point". You obviously never read his book or saw his documentary. Show me where he "alludes to it with a great deal of innuendo"? You can't. You're just talking out your azz. How do you interpret the Hopster's writing in terms of of who's responsible for 9/11? What impression do you get from it, that is apparently different from Jeff's? There is nothing in Hopsicker's writings ANYWHERE that even suggests the Saudis masterminded Sept. 11. Hopsicker wrote that Atta met with a wealthy Saudi businessman in FL. on at least two witnessed occasions: late Dec. 2000 and early March 2001, both in Venice, FL. Show proof of anything he's written, re: Saudi/911 beyond that. The truth is, you & Jeff just make it up as you go knowing none of the webfraud3 contingency will call you out on it. As for Jeff, his DD was as "FLAWED" as yours. He "alluded" to imaginary dots too. You guys should actually read Hopsicker's work BEFORE you embarrass yourself analyzing it.