To: Sarmad Y. Hermiz who wrote (212129 ) 10/1/2006 1:16:14 PM From: plantlife Read Replies (2) | Respond to of 275872 No, you went beyond that point by using deliberately, and "in order to prop up my investments. My comment, was I didn't believe he worked at Intel. That was based on his insinuation that I should interpret his training lessons at Intel preclude any violations of the law by him or any of the other 100,000 Intel workers, based merely on these lessons!!! How far out to lunch is that??? Your quote: "So there is a strong likelihood that they knew there is a line they shouldn't cross, and made an effort to not cross it." But that is an assumption that 100,000 people made that effort. "They certainly didn't make the effort in Japan." Are you trying to implying that Intel is not guilty of any violations merely because they held classes for salesmen? Why did the Intel gang show up here with an alleged lawyer to verify Intel's defense on a "Message Board." They trial won't be until 2009. I certainly can't do anything for my investments by squabbling about that, especially after I had already agreed with Ephud that it was not worth discussing. That is something that belongs in the back of the auditorium, not ready for prime time. There are more exciting things to discuss. If you read my initial posts about the trial, they were totally neutral, as I made a comment or two regarding how both sides objected to the arguments each other had made in defining their opinions on the ruling. It bothers you and your pals a lot more than it bothers me, I certainly didn't drag out an alleged lawyer, and an alleged Salesmen about an alleged suggestion that we went to school on this, so we are innocent. And, this was an issue that e...d and I agreed was of no consequence, so he the links to his pal at I-hub with the school story. After that, he links to his supposed Lawyer with another long winded dissertation proclaiming Intel's innocence about something which is so far away it doesn't require any time discussing. It won't be relevant until 2009. That was just a waste of time proving nothing, about something that is pretty much, IMO, a none issue. You and your pals are the ones who are harping on it. Get over it, there are better topics.