Someone released these rumors from the D.C. protest

[Synergistic Explosions]

I have no idea who wrote this, or why. Just saw it on the Yahoo message boards for the stock CRYP (cryptologic)

[ QUOTE ]
Rumors (Not rated) 10-Oct-06 06:30 pm
October 10, 2006 - While several major players in the gambling industry were shutting down shop in the UK, the Casino Gambling Web was in Washington D.C. protesting against the gambling ban bill that has not yet been signed by President Bush.

While we were protesting in our nation's capital we saw signs shoved in Senator's faces, we saw President Bush give two speeches, and we heard some very interesting rumors.

All protests rush a great sense of unity and pride through the veins of the protestors, the same holds true with this one, but unusual to this protest, no one wanted to give their last names or explain why they had such a personal interest in protesting. Therefore, no sources can be revealed, but several very serious and interesting rumors were floating through the protesting crowd.

What was the most interesting rumor in Washington D.C. yesterday? That the Port Security Bill the president is expected to sign on Friday will be very different from what was released in Congress - concerning internet gambling.

The rumor was that banks have been lobbying hard over the past two weeks and that they may have achieved their lobbying goals of getting the banking enforcement section of the law discarded from the wording. It was rumored that the part of the law making banks liable for enforcing the law will be removed because banks lobbied that it would be impossible for them to enforce.

The part of the bill that everyone still seemed worried about was the fact that ISP's would still have to block gambling sites if told to do so. The bill would not make it the responsibility of the ISP's to find and shut down sites that either had gambling links on them or were gambling sites in themselves, however if they were informed about such sites they would be held responsible for blocking US citizens from getting to them. But, that part of the bill would not be enforcebale for 270 days, according to the rumors.

Much debate went on as to why the offshore companies were backing out of the US market when apparently they have no real need to. The bill says that a gambling website is not allowed to accept transactions from US citizens, however, most people at the protest did not understand how the US could enforce laws on companies that run their business on foreign land. Alteriror motives were suggested.

Note: All rumors revealed in this article are just that and cannot be taken as fact. We will give more information as we receive more information. As we stated from the time this bill passed, everything is speculaton until the bill is signed and enforced.


[/ QUOTE ]

[teddyFBI]

classic pump+dump scam

[NoSoup4U]

I'm not the biggest fan of Bush, but it seems unlikely that he would decide that the entire legislative branch no longer matters and he can change the bill to say whatever he likes and then sign it.

[whittiphil]

this seems legally impossible. Bush can't rewrite laws and sign them.

[uncleshady]

LOL LINEITEMVETOAMENTS






p.s. msacras

[Vern]

[ QUOTE ]
this seems legally impossible. Bush can't rewrite laws and sign them.

[/ QUOTE ]
Signing Statements

[Grey]

[ QUOTE ]
I'm not the biggest fan of Bush, but it seems unlikely that he would decide that the entire legislative branch no longer matters and he can change the bill to say whatever he likes and then sign it.

[/ QUOTE ]Are you kidding? That is exactly what he's been doing with his signing statements- to the point that the Republican Chair of the Judiciary Committee has been trying to pass a bill that will allow Congress to sue him.

He can't do that in this case though because he can't make a Constitutional argument about that part of the bill.

This rumor is crap.

[ericicecream]

I'm sure that Bush favors UIGEA and is glad to see it in there.

[Vern]

[ QUOTE ]
I'm sure that Bush favors UIGEA and is glad to see it in there.

[/ QUOTE ]
I was just refering the poster that said it was impossible to rewrite a law as he signed it to the topic of signing statements, which Bush uses for just that affect. I agree with the belief that Bush will be for the law and will sign it.

[4_2_it]

That whole press release is a sham. I can't believe any senators were around on a Federal holiday 2 weeks after Congress recesed.