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.

Technology Stocks : LORAL -- Political Discussion -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Zoltan! who wrote (319)	5/28/1998 11:19:00 PM
From: Dragonfly	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 880

I said your proposed test was as absurd as a poll tax, and then it became clear you didn't even know what a poll tax was until I made you look it up. In your post you say: "maybe Dragonfly and his ilk would learn something after being refused a score or more times." Which shows clear intent to discriminate. The supreme court has already ruled on this issue: laws.findlaw.com Note the part that says: (a) The decree properly enjoined further use of the interpretation test. P. 154. I knew you would try and put words in my mouth. Why is it conservatives are so often intellectually dishonest? Oh, I know why, its because most people are to stupid and think "well, where there's smoke there must be fire." Keep throwing your smoke bombs. Dragonfly

To: Zoltan! who wrote (319)	5/28/1998 11:37:00 PM
From: Dragonfly	Read Replies (3) \| Respond to of 880

Btw, we all know that Clinton's actions against the advice of the State Department and the Justice Department were made for two reasons: 1) as quid pro quo for his New #1 campaign donor, Schwartz. This isn't worth responding to because you have provided nothing useful other than a brain dead repetition of the allegations. But you can't avoid the question: Why did Bush and Reagan do it? Why did Clinton approve them for everyone else? Hmmm??? Beuller? 2) to derail the criminal investigation of Loral's illegal actions. Which makes absolutely no sense whatsoever-- the investigation has not been derailed. Furthermore, Loral's actions were not illegal, but merely, unadvised. After the report was turned over to the chinese, the rules were changed to make prior permission necessary. Dragonfly