Announcement

Collapse

Forum Rules (Everyone Must Read!!!)

1] What you CAN NOT post.

You agree, through your use of this service, that you will not use this forum to post any material which is:
- abusive
- vulgar
- hateful
- harassing
- personal attacks
- obscene

You also may not:
- post images that are too large (max is 500*500px)
- post any copyrighted material unless the copyright is owned by you or cited properly.
- post in UPPER CASE, which is considered yelling
- post messages which insult the Armenians, Armenian culture, traditions, etc
- post racist or other intentionally insensitive material that insults or attacks another culture (including Turks)

The Ankap thread is excluded from the strict rules because that place is more relaxed and you can vent and engage in light insults and humor. Notice it's not a blank ticket, but just a place to vent. If you go into the Ankap thread, you enter at your own risk of being clowned on.
What you PROBABLY SHOULD NOT post...
Do not post information that you will regret putting out in public. This site comes up on Google, is cached, and all of that, so be aware of that as you post. Do not ask the staff to go through and delete things that you regret making available on the web for all to see because we will not do it. Think before you post!


2] Use descriptive subject lines & research your post. This means use the SEARCH.

This reduces the chances of double-posting and it also makes it easier for people to see what they do/don't want to read. Using the search function will identify existing threads on the topic so we do not have multiple threads on the same topic.

3] Keep the focus.

Each forum has a focus on a certain topic. Questions outside the scope of a certain forum will either be moved to the appropriate forum, closed, or simply be deleted. Please post your topic in the most appropriate forum. Users that keep doing this will be warned, then banned.

4] Behave as you would in a public location.

This forum is no different than a public place. Behave yourself and act like a decent human being (i.e. be respectful). If you're unable to do so, you're not welcome here and will be made to leave.

5] Respect the authority of moderators/admins.

Public discussions of moderator/admin actions are not allowed on the forum. It is also prohibited to protest moderator actions in titles, avatars, and signatures. If you don't like something that a moderator did, PM or email the moderator and try your best to resolve the problem or difference in private.

6] Promotion of sites or products is not permitted.

Advertisements are not allowed in this venue. No blatant advertising or solicitations of or for business is prohibited.
This includes, but not limited to, personal resumes and links to products or
services with which the poster is affiliated, whether or not a fee is charged
for the product or service. Spamming, in which a user posts the same message repeatedly, is also prohibited.

7] We retain the right to remove any posts and/or Members for any reason, without prior notice.


- PLEASE READ -

Members are welcome to read posts and though we encourage your active participation in the forum, it is not required. If you do participate by posting, however, we expect that on the whole you contribute something to the forum. This means that the bulk of your posts should not be in "fun" threads (e.g. Ankap, Keep & Kill, This or That, etc.). Further, while occasionally it is appropriate to simply voice your agreement or approval, not all of your posts should be of this variety: "LOL Member213!" "I agree."
If it is evident that a member is simply posting for the sake of posting, they will be removed.


8] These Rules & Guidelines may be amended at any time. (last update September 17, 2009)

If you believe an individual is repeatedly breaking the rules, please report to admin/moderator.
See more
See less

Martha Stewart

Collapse
X
Collapse
 
  • Page of 3
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts
Previous 1 2 3 template Next
  • #21
    It should be interesting to note that Martha Stewart was not convicted of insider trading. She was convicted of perjury. It should also be interesting to note that the law firm she was being advised by when she lied under oath has a very close business relationship with the firm that defended her in the perjury case. Seems like a conflict of interest to be charged with the defense of a woman who could potentially ruin your business associates.

    Comment

    • #22
      Originally posted by loseyourname It should be interesting to note that Martha Stewart was not convicted of insider trading. She was convicted of perjury. It should also be interesting to note that the law firm she was being advised by when she lied under oath has a very close business relationship with the firm that defended her in the perjury case. Seems like a conflict of interest to be charged with the defense of a woman who could potentially ruin your business associates.
      This is what I've been saying. The charge was not insider trading but mere "lying". Welcome to the age of thought crime and the failure of the American "justice system". It's not even "insider trading" since she wasn't tipped off by someone from inside the company, but rather her own broker. This whole thing seems too fishy.
      Achkerov kute.

      Comment

      • #23
        Originally posted by Anonymouse This is what I've been saying. The charge was not insider trading but mere "lying". Welcome to the age of thought crime and the failure of the American "justice system". It's not even "insider trading" since she wasn't tipped off by someone from inside the company, but rather her own broker. This whole thing seems too fishy.
        Bla bla bla bla bla Nothing fishy about it. Stewart and the CEO of that drug company were friends and had the same broker. They couldn't prove that one phone conversation between Stewart and the CEO occured so they had to get her on lesser charges. If anything she's lucky. The broker's assitant sang like a bird and told the gov't everything but there wasn't enough evidence to go with his testimony. The defence accused him of being a pothead. Which took away from his credibility. Stweart's broker gave her information she wasn't supposed to have because they were all friends. Doesn't get any more "inside" than that.

        Comment

        • #24
          That hasn't been proven thought Mr. Eggplant. In a court of law something must be proven beyond a reasonable doubt. The fact that the prosecution failed means it was never established as certainty, despite appealing to your emotions of what the case ought to be.
          Achkerov kute.

          Comment

          • #25
            Sorry, that is not a valid answer.
            Achkerov kute.

            Comment

            • #26
              I like this picture !! LOL!!
              Attached Files
              VerTigO

              Comment

              • #27
                Originally posted by Anonymouse This is what I've been saying. The charge was not insider trading but mere "lying". Welcome to the age of thought crime and the failure of the American "justice system". It's not even "insider trading" since she wasn't tipped off by someone from inside the company, but rather her own broker. This whole thing seems too fishy.
                It's also interesting that Bill Clinton was guilty of exactly the same crime that she was convicted of. Why isn't he in prison?

                Comment

                Previous 1 2 3 template Next
                Working...
                X