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.

Microcap & Penny Stocks : PanAmerican BanCorp (PABN) -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Cannon who wrote (18701)	11/21/1998 2:41:00 PM
From: ISOMAN	Read Replies (4) \| Respond to of 43774

Randy, be fair. Perhaps Rosario is Completely on the level. Let's look at the facts. Despite that I could not find an Elliott Lanza listed among the 600,000 Listed Commercial pilots in the data base, perhaps it is merely a data entry mistake. Secondly he stated that 26 years ago he served in NAM and Enjoyed flying over the Jungles using a variety of Machine guns. He also stated that It was in the same army that he spent six years getting that pilots licence. Here is the part that is confusing..26 years ago he was 17. People have been known to get into the army under the age of 18 so we won't dispute that. What concerns me is this. IF, he was flying gun missions in Nam, it would mean he was already certified to fly ( as testified, a 6 year process) He also said that he got this training through the army. So if he was already flying in Nam, obviously the solution to my dilemma is that he joined the American army when he was 11, trained those 6 years, flew out to Vietnam, and fought some missions, then was wounded where he collected a disability pension for the next 26 years, unable to fly again( hence the words disability pension) sounds reasonable to me, an 11 year old junior highschool dropout, joins army, trains 6 years, to be injured in battle.