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.

Gold/Mining/Energy : Caussa Capital (formerly Antares) T.CAU -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: marcos who wrote (4145)	8/8/1998 2:38:00 PM
From: Alan Markoff	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 4718

Antares has confirmed something by their threat against john. A person has a legal RIGHT to protect themselves against slander if you think otherwise your living in a dream world................ Your speculation that the Company is somehow guilty by responding and protecting its reputation is utterly nonsense. Terms of Use; B. You agree not to use the service for illegal purposes or for the transmission of material that is unlawful, harassing, libelous, invasive of another's privacy, abusive, threatening, harmful, vulgar, obscene, tortious, improper or otherwise objectionable, or that infringes or may infringe the intellectual property or other rights of another.

To: marcos who wrote (4145)	8/8/1998 2:46:00 PM
From: Gabe Heti	Respond to of 4718

That's pretty perverse logic. Are you suggesting keeping quiet if you are falsely accused and defending yourself if the accusation is true? Doesn't seem to work like that in the real world. That's like throwing witches tied up into the river. If they survive they are witches and are burned at the stake. If they sink and drown, they were innocent of witchcraft. Oops, sorry, I guess we were wrong. The accused ends up dead all the same. Our laws are now slightly more enlightened. This is precisely why libel laws are in existence. To allow a falsely accused individual to defend himself against defamation. Gabe

To: marcos who wrote (4145)	8/8/1998 3:30:00 PM
From: E. Charters	Respond to of 4718

Starr: Monica, honey, did you s**k Mr. Bill, Ovally? Lewinsky: I plead the sixth amendment Starr: Don't you mean the fifth amendment? Lewinksy: He told me his amendment was six. Actually I was ready to tell him that it was eight because they like that. Starr: You mean he told you to lie? Lewinksy: Actually I don't mind lying but kneeling was ok too. I bent over backwards over so he could analyze the fundamentals of the fact. Starr: Are you backing out of testimony? Lewinsky: Testimony? I never looked at his testimony as it is considered impolite. I didn't have to back out as his testimony wasn't long enough. Defense: Your honour, the witness is sucking up to the prosecution! Lewinsky: I never took money for it! That is a lie! Starr: Do you believe in the constitution, Monica? Lewinsky: Sure it's ok for some girls, cause how else can they make a living? But I think it is inaccurate. Starr: How is that? Lewinsky: Well, the truth is you can't hold it to be always self evident, sometimes you have to play with it. and all men are NOT created equal.. so I will take the third amendment even.. if it's presidented.. sometimes you have to take the first job that comes when work is short... Starr: I submit that you are not coming across .. Lewinsky: On my honour, I ALWAYS come across especially if he does.. and submission is what I am good at .. Defense: The prosecution is badgering the witness! Lewinsky: I never did animal acts, although I did wear a leopard skin underwear once, I certainly never took money .. what kind of girl do you think I am..? Starr: Your honour, I call "deep throat" to the stand. Lewinsky: Does this mean I am out of a job?