Refco Fallout

Complete B.S. But it does look you've got a few hangers-on that you've convinced of this. But again, you've repeatedly shot from the hip, made outrageous claims that later when confronted you could not substantiate. Now, some folks might call YOU a liar. I don't. I just think you shoot from the hip, spout off in words that you can't back up. This trait is really more like intellectual laziness than outright lying.

But what is more concerning is when you call the people who confront you with these unsubstantiated claims "liars", "morons", and etc. as you have done.

These personal attacks together with the numerous unsubstantiated claims have gone a long ways toward defining your character. I think at this point the best thing you could do is NOT post anything further regarding Refco UNLESS you are CERTAIN about the facts. If you do, then you might want to use words that indicate that your opinions are not of a factual nature.

OldTrader

 

I really don't care that he told me to "go to hell", not once, but twice. And his other immature name calling showed his true character. I was intrigued by all that's happened with Refco and had read the thread from the start. And after all the going back and forth I merely asked if he'd substantiate his claims. He clearly was not going to respond to you or OldTrader. I felt my suggestion to go compose his evidence was a good idea. And he flew off the handle. I can only suggest to him that to recklessly say things that he can't perhaps back up can be a serious issue. But I'm sure he has a dictionary and can look up slander and libel. And interestingly, since he posted about them robbing their customers blind he's not retracted that statement. That's where he can get himself in trouble if he can not prove such allegations. For in such a case one is knowingly standing by their statement after having opportunity to correct themself.

 

First ten pages or so of new indictment has a nice history. Rest is just legal.

http://www.nytimes.com/packages/pdf/business/11refco.pdf

Focus of inquiring minds will now probably be who the unnamed co-conspirators are. Also, gummint is going to have to disclose who had the blown out accounts at the start of the scheme - so I'll be able to gossip about it.

 

Agreed.