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 Space & Communications -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: dougjn who wrote (3502)	5/29/1998 3:27:00 PM
From: John Lacelle	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 10852

Hey Doug, If Loral is so clean, why was there a Justice Department Investigation into this weapons technology transfer? If the White House is so clean, why did they attempt to obstruct the investigation? They say that Bill Clinton would have never put the national security of this nation up for sale for a few hundred thousand dollars of illegal campaign contributions because he is not that reckless...but then, this is a guy would risked EVERYTHING he had for a couple of blow jobs in the Oval Office. You make the call... -John

To: dougjn who wrote (3502)	5/29/1998 3:38:00 PM
From: donss	Respond to of 10852

Doug, Thanks for responding. No need to do any extra work quoting articles. I just wanted to know if I missed something in today's articles. BTW I agree with your assessment of the situation. -Don

To: dougjn who wrote (3502)	5/29/1998 6:45:00 PM
From: Diogeron	Respond to of 10852

Right on the money IMHO. For those of us who see LOR as a long term investment, a good question might be: how important will this issue be twelve months from now (and six months after the mid-term house elections) to the financial integrity of LOR? Personally, I'm putting some more in my SEP this week FWIW.

To: dougjn who wrote (3502)	5/29/1998 9:44:00 PM
From: Mr. Adrenaline	Read Replies (3) \| Respond to of 10852

I can't stand it anymore, and got to comment. Doug, I want to say that you are right on target here. Having first hand, or otherwise direct knowledge of some of the facts surrounding this incident, I wish to say that your conclusions are on target. I don't know everything about this incident, and don't wish to become an unofficial company spokesman -- that could land me into hot water, especially with the sensitivity that surrounds this issue. But what I don't know I can make a pretty good guess at, and again, you right on. This whole incident has really made me realize the sorry state of our country - and specifically the media. I have always prided myself on tacking the media with a grain of salt, but in this case, the media has portrayed facts in an inaccurate fashion that implies the wrong conclusion. And in some cases, there has been out right false hoods. I will never again believe what I see in the media at face value. When I was a graduate student I was working on a NASA funded inter-planetary study. It was just a study, but parts of it have grown into real hardware that may yet fly someday - but that's another story. (I haven't worked on said project for over 10 years.) Somehow a local news station at the time became fascinated with the story that surrounded this study, and they sent a crew to tape a story for the 10 o'clock news. They interviewed myself and a few of colleagues. Later that night, I watched in amazement as I saw myself on the 10 o'clock news say something I never said. I was watching myself, with my mouth flapping, hearing my voice say something that was utter BS. What had happened was that took what I said out of context. Now most people would never know the difference, but anyone who knew the basic laws of physics must of thought I was a fool. I remember thinking at the time that the media was never really interested in presenting the facts as they were in just presenting a story. This Loral incident has just put an exclamation point on that fact. Mr A