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 : Bob Brinker, Moneytalk and Marketimer -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Honey_Bee who wrote (1363)	10/5/2007 2:04:21 PM
From: EQ	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 2121

Dear Ms. honeybeerose, PMFJI, but I strongly believe that Mr. Hulbert (being the astute and professional journalist that he is) would likely be in possession of written confirmation from Mr. Brinker granting Mr. Hulbert permission to post a certain verbatim passage from one of Mr. Brinkers recently published newsletters. It is also possible that some sort of carte blanche publishing agreement exists between the two parties. Do you know FOR A FACT and have PROOF that Mr. Hulbert published the material in question without Mr. Brinkers permission? If so, I am sure that everyone here would love to learn all of the details of your investigation.

To: Honey_Bee who wrote (1363)	10/5/2007 4:42:36 PM
From: Math Junkie	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 2121

There's a lot of speculation going on here in the absence of facts. In particular, we don't know how extensive the information was that was allegedly being revealed. Was Dr. James just paraphrasing Brinker's general market stance as Hulbert did, was he sending entire copies of Marketimer to his friends, or was he doing something in between? Without knowing what he actually did it's hard to form an intelligent opinion about it.

To: Honey_Bee who wrote (1363)	10/5/2007 5:04:29 PM
From: queenleah	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 2121

Ms. honey, first of all, I am not your witness, and secondly, you're still asking me hypothetical questions. Thirdly, I do NOT know of my OWN knowledge whether ANY of those "for the sake of argument" statements are accurate. Note: I'm not saying they are or aren't, I'm saying I have no personal knowledge of same. Do YOU have anything of your own personal knowledge other than what James has offered that you could testify of your own personal knowledge in a court of law?