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 : The Epic American Credit and Bond Bubble Laboratory -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Knighty Tin who wrote (44294)	10/26/2005 4:42:39 PM
From: Win-Lose-Draw	Respond to of 110194

It's not that simple. People use Refco because Refco will do things that are in the clients near-term interest, but not necessarily strictly legal, without being explicity told to do so by the client. They are the canonical example of a nudge, nudge, wink, wink prime broker who reads between the lines of a client's requests while giving them plausible deniability. This is exactly why they have been successful in the business, and they've been doing this a long long time (eg, Hillary's infamous no-money-down futures trade, guess who faciliated that?) There is zero doubt Rogers knows this and takes advantage of this; there are dozen less "malleable" companies he could have used, but he chose instead the accomadibility of Refco. His lawsuit is simply there to throw some of the dogs of the scent because he has some serious legal exposure himself because he has known all along what was happening. ...if the money has been spent on wine, whisky, and women, it's a moot point. That's Enron, not Refco. In Refco's case, the funds at issue had been used to to help out clients who had gotten into trouble in earlier years. Which is one of the reasons people like Refco, they are willing to extend a helping hand to a good customer, even if it stretches the rules. Rogers is as dirty in this as anyone else.

To: Knighty Tin who wrote (44294)	10/26/2005 6:05:31 PM
From: NOW	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 110194

The more you look, the more you'll find that our Constitution has been subverted to the point of virtual irrelevance. The legislative branch has abdicated its exclusive right to declare war to the president, who was appointed by a federal court that undermined the states' constitutional right to manage and settle election disputes. Individuals' protection against unreasonable searches have been trashed, habeas corpus is a joke, and double jeopardy has become routine as those exonerated by criminal court face second trials in civil court. Our system of checks and balances has collapsed, the victim of a citizenry more interested in entertaining distraction than eternal vigilance. Where evil men rule, law cannot protect those who sleep. commondreams.org