To: realitybytes who wrote (92751 ) 10/10/2005 3:20:19 AM From: Maurice Winn Respond to of 122087 <I don't know what his attempt to board the Airliner with false papers was all about, > What the heck is that? False papers? Don't you just need a ticket and a passport? What papers? And you mean this isn't all over? I haven't been following it, having just noticed that the Anthony@ stream was flowing along again. It seems very unwise to write that rant [Anthony@'s] if it's likely to be shown to a sentencing judge. It has always fascinated me how Anthony@ had cult-like status, with true-believer followers. I've always seen a personality who I thought was marginal at best, and I am not in the slightest surprised to see him having a litany of litigation. Putting a positive spin on matters, Egyptians, from a culture of cronyistic crooked kleptomania dumped into a culture of greed and avarice, but with a litigious legal system not given to accepting crooks, I'm not surprised he fell foul of the system. Look how many fall foul of the system. Right now we have the Plame enquiry rattling around King George II and the previous president was also hauled before the legal system. Look at Bernie Ebbers. Enron people. The perp walk. This is not a forgiving society; where even Martha Stewart was gaoled for some minor infraction of trading rules which led her to obstruct justice [I think that's what she did wrong - not the actual trading]. Given the FBI links, I'd say this is a serious matter. It's not like a bit of chat over the fence with somebody who worked for a company and it was naughty insider trading. As far as being innocent on most of the charges, being a little bit pregnant is not a lot of comfort. I suppose the prosecution lined up all they could, hoping that they could get the good charges to stick, but making do with the others if that's all that was proved. Surely Anthony@'s lawyers advised him on whether that rant was a good thing. Maybe it is. Watching this space. Mqurice