This is topic CSHD: The Never-ending Story in forum Hot Stocks Free for All ! at Allstocks.com's Bulletin Board.


To visit this topic, use this URL:
http://www.allstocks.com/stockmessageboard/ubb/ultimatebb.php/ubb/get_topic/f/2/t/014576.html

Posted by T e x on :
 
copied this Pacer update from i-hub thread:

quote:
FILED IN CLERKS OFFICE
U.&D.C . Atlanta
W0 0 7 2047
JAMES N . 7 EN• L K
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF GEORGIA
ATLANTA DIVISION
1 ;06-CV-2565-CC
Defendants .
SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE
COMMISSION,
Plaintiff,
V.
CONVERSION SOLUTIONS HOLDING
CORPORATION and RUFUS PAUL
HARRIS a/k/a PAUL RUFUS HARRIS,
Civil Action No .
MOTION FOR RECONSIDERATION/REHEARING OF THE
OCTOBER 3D'H ORDER ENTERED BY THIS COURT
COMES NOW the Defendant, RUFUS PAUL HARRIS, a/k/a
PAUL RUFUS• HARRIS and Moves this Court to reconsider the
findings of fact and vacate the Order entered based on those erroneous
findings an/or conclusions in this cause based upon this Defendant being
denied due process of law and hindered in answering Plaintiff's
Complaint by other unethical practices and in support thereof states :
This Motion is based on the Court's denial of this Defendant's
Motion to set aside the default entered by the Clerk in this action . This
Order was entered by this Court without the benefit of a h earin g on this
Case 1:06-cv-02568-CC Document 20 Filed 11/07/2007 Page 1 of 9


matter to hear the Defendant's argument on this matter .
1 . That after service of process upon this Defendant, the said
Defendant did not have funds available for the substantial retainer to
employ an attorney versed in Securities Law.
2. This Defendant was s ubjected to a n unauthorized and illegal
change of officers and directors of Conversion Solutions Holding
Corporation and was unable to have access to all records necessary to
formulate a proper defense and Counterclaim to the Plaintiff's
Complaint.
3. During the time that this Defendant was deprived access to
records to defend this action, the Securities and Exchange Commission
seized the records from those individuals who had control of said
records and once again, this Defendant had no access to said records to
prepare his answer to Plaintiff's Complaint.
4. This Defendant entered into talks with the Plaintiff, cooperated in
every way and was given a false sense that the Plaintiff would subpoena
the documents necessary for the Defendant to defend this action but the
Plaintiff did not acquire these documents or if they did, they did not
Case 1:06-cv-02568-CC Document 20 Filed 11/07/2007 Page 2 of 9


share them with the Defendant as promised, causing a default to be
entered against the Defendant while the above referenced talks were
ongoing, depriving this Defendant of due process of law .
5. The conduct of the Plaintiff and its attorneys has violated the
sta ndards of professional conduct for members of the Georgia Bar as
well as Federal ethics standards by withholding information from this
Defendant while defaulting him and continuing talks after the default
was entered .
6. This Defendant finally realized that the Plaintiff was never going
to supply him with the promised information he needed to file an
appropriate answer and th erefore the Defendant filed his answer, late
as it was, without the needed information to file a proper answer and
the Plaintiff moved to strike said answer .
7. The Plaintiff does not have clean hands in dealing with this
Defendant, has committed a breach of e thics and has had a severe
conflict of interest by withholding exculpatory evidence and records
from the Defendant, thus denying the Defenda nt Due Process in this
action.
Case 1:06-cv-02568-CC Document 20 Filed 11/07/2007 Page 3 of 9


C} The phone recordings and messages of the Home Office
were unavailable to defendant after the illegal hostile
takeover to provide as evidence .
8. The failure to file a timely answer by this Defendant is due to
excusable neglect which was caused by the unethical actions of the
Plaintiff and its Attorneys .
9. Defendant is in the process of drafting a complaint to be fi led with
the Georgia Bar Association to investigate the ethics of the Plaintiff's
attorney's in dealing with this Defendant.
lO.Other events that occurred to prevent this Defendant from filing
a timely answer, defenses and counterclaim to Plaintiffs Complaint are
as follows :
A) The Email account holding the majority of the evidence
was illegally seized by James Gee and never remitted to
Defendant.
B) After strenuous evidence gather process by Conversion
Executives of the 1000 Plus illegal shareholders names and
the firms that sold them their shares, The Names of the
illegal shareholders were illegally seized by James Gee,
Justin Frazier and John Arlitt to prevent the production of
said evidence to the court.
Case 1:06-cv-02568-CC Document 20 Filed 11/07/2007 Page 4 of 9


WHEREFORE, THE Defendant, RUFUS PAUL HARRIS, a/k/a PAUL
RUFUS HARRIS, MOVES THIS Court to reconsider and vacate the Order
that was entered by this Court on October 301b 2007 for the foregoing reasons
and allow this Defendant to properly-answer Plaintiff's Complaint.
e ~...a
Rufus 1 Harris alk/a
Paul Ru u s Harris
P.O. Box 18
Adairsville, Georgia 30103
Case 1:06-cv-02568-CC Document 20 Filed 11/07/2007 Page 5 of 9


BEFORE ME, the undersigned authority, personally appeared RUFUS
PAUL HARRIS a/k/a PAUL RUFUS HARRIS, who, after first being duly
sworn by me according to law, states that the foregoing facts set forth in the
above Motion For Reconsideration/Rehearing are true and correct to the best
of his knowledge and belief.
NOTARY PUBLIC
0114 F . At L,
STATE N ~
OF
TENNESSEE
NOTARY
~ PUBLIC ~
10
.01
~lllV v" ~
My Commission Expires : I ~ (-Z,t ,c0
I, RUFUS PAUL HARRIS a/k/a PAUL RUFUS HARRIS, after being duly
sworn according to law , do state and affirm, under penalty of perjury, that
the facts set forth in the foregoing Motion for Reconsideration/Rehearing are
true and correct to my best knowledge and belief .
d
Rufus null Harris aIk/a
Paul Rufus Harris
STATEOF County of ~ r~ s
Case 1:06-cv-02568-CC Document 20 Filed 11/07/2007 Page 6 of 9


Office of the Attorney General
State of Georgia
40 Capitol Square, SW
Atlanta, Ga 30334
I HEREBY CERTIFY that a true and correct copy of the foregoing
Motion for Reconsideration/Rehearing has been furnished t o William P
Hicks, Debbie T. Hampton and Alana R Black, Attorney's for Plaintiff, 34 75
Lenox Road, NE, Suite 1000, Atlanta, GA 30326-1232 by U .S. Mail this 5th
day of November, 2008.
~. ~ ~.,
Rufus aul Harris a/k/a
Paul Rufus Harris
Copied to the following ;
United States Attorney General
U.S. Department of Justice
950 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW
Washington, DC 20530-0001
Case 1:06-cv-02568-CC Document 20 Filed 11/07/2007 Page 7 of 9


IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF GEORGIA
ATLANTA DIVISION
Civil Action No.
1 :06-CV-2568-CC
Defendants.
Plaintiff or its Attorneys or unknown third parties and cannot be retrieved in
SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE
COMMISSION,
Plaintiff,
V.
CONVERSION SOLUTIONS HOLDING
CORPORATION and RUFUS PAUL
HARRIS a/k/a PAUL RUFUS HARRIS,
MOTION FOR ENLARGEMENT OF TIME TO
FILE SUPPLEMENTAL AFFIDAVITS
COMES NOW the Defendant, RUFUS PAUL HARRIS, a/k/a PAUL
RUFUS HARRIS, and moves this Court to extend the time period for filing
affidavits and submitting documentation supporting this Motionfor an
additional 60 days, until January 2nd , 2008.
The grounds for this Motion are that the time period set forth in the
Federal Rules of Civil Procedure is insufficient to find witnesses to execute
affidavits or to find and submit other documents and/or evidence supporting
this Defendants Motion .
The needed documents to support this Motion are in the possession of the
Case 1:06-cv-02568-CC Document 20 Filed 11/07/2007 Page 8 of 9


Paul Rufus Harris
a 10 day period from the entry of this Courts Order entered on October 30,
2007.
WHEREFORE, THE Defendant, RUFUS PAUL HARRIS, a/k/a PAUL
RUFUS HARRIS, moves this Court for an enlargement of time, until January
2, 2008, to file supplemental affidavits, documents and/or other evidence to
support the Defendant's Motion for Reconsideration/Rehearing heretofore
filed in this cause
I HEREBY CERTIFY that a true and correct copy of the foregoing
Motion for Enlargement of Time has been furnished to William P Hicks,
Debbie T. Hampton and Alana R Black, Attorney's for Plaintiff, 3475 Lenox
Road, NE, Suite 1000, Atlanta, GA 30326-1232 by U.S. Mail this 5th day of
November, 2008.
f~
Rufus ul Harris a/k/a
Case 1:06-cv-02568-CC Document 20 Filed 11/07/2007 Page 9 of 9

unbelievable...staggeringly unbelievable

(for notes, references, DD, etc here's the preceding thread:

http://www.allstocks.com/stockmessageboard/ubb/ultimatebb.php/ubb/get_topic/f/2/ t/013717/p/105.html)
 
Posted by fhalyesss on :
 
So your thoughts now Tex?????
[Eek!] [Eek!] [Eek!] [Eek!]
 
Posted by fhalyesss on :
 
FILED IN CLERKS OFFICE
U.&D.C . Atlanta
W0 0 7 2047
JAMES N . 7 EN• L K
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF GEORGIA
ATLANTA DIVISION
1 ;06-CV-2565-CC
Defendants .
SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE
COMMISSION,
Plaintiff,
V.
CONVERSION SOLUTIONS HOLDING
CORPORATION and RUFUS PAUL
HARRIS a/k/a PAUL RUFUS HARRIS,
Civil Action No .
MOTION FOR RECONSIDERATION/REHEARING OF THE
OCTOBER 3D''H ORDER ENTERED BY THIS COURT
COMES NOW the Defendant, RUFUS PAUL HARRIS, a/k/a
PAUL RUFUS• HARRIS and Moves this Court to reconsider the
findings of fact and vacate the Order entered based on those erroneous
findings an/or conclusions in this cause based upon this Defendant being
denied due process of law and hindered in answering Plaintiff's
Complaint by other unethical practices and in support thereof states :
This Motion is based on the Court's denial of this Defendant's
Motion to set aside the default entered by the Clerk in this action . This
Order was entered by this Court without the benefit of a h earin g on this
Case 1:06-cv-02568-CC Document 20 Filed 11/07/2007 Page 1 of 9
matter to hear the Defendant's argument on this matter .
1 . That after service of process upon this Defendant, the said
Defendant did not have funds available for the substantial retainer to
employ an attorney versed in Securities Law.
2. This Defendant was s ubjected to a n unauthorized and illegal
change of officers and directors of Conversion Solutions Holding
Corporation and was unable to have access to all records necessary to
formulate a proper defense and Counterclaim to the Plaintiff's
Complaint.
3. During the time that this Defendant was deprived access to
records to defend this action, the Securities and Exchange Commission
seized the records from those individuals who had control of said
records and once again, this Defendant had no access to said records to
prepare his answer to Plaintiff's Complaint.
4. This Defendant entered into talks with the Plaintiff, cooperated in
every way and was given a false sense that the Plaintiff would subpoena
the documents necessary for the Defendant to defend this action but the
Plaintiff did not acquire these documents or if they did, they did not
Case 1:06-cv-02568-CC Document 20 Filed 11/07/2007 Page 2 of 9
share them with the Defendant as promised, causing a default to be
entered against the Defendant while the above referenced talks were
ongoing, depriving this Defendant of due process of law .
5. [Eek!] The conduct of the Plaintiff and its attorneys has violated the
standards of professional conduct for members of the Georgia Bar as
well as Federal ethics standards by withholding information from this
Defendant while defaulting him and continuing talks after the default
was entered .
[Eek!] 6. This Defendant finally realized that the Plaintiff was never going
to supply him with the promised information he needed to file an
appropriate answer and th erefore the Defendant filed his answer, late
as it was, without the needed information to file a proper answer and
the Plaintiff moved to strike said answer .
7. [Eek!] The Plaintiff does not have clean hands in dealing with this
Defendant, has committed a breach of ethics and has had a severe
conflict of interest by withholding exculpatory evidence and records
from the Defendant, thus denying the Defendant Due Process in this [Eek!]
action.
Case 1:06-cv-02568-CC Document 20 Filed 11/07/2007 Page 3 of 9
C} The phone recordings and messages of the Home Office
were unavailable to defendant after the illegal hostile
takeover to provide as evidence .
8. The failure to file a timely answer by this Defendant is due to
excusable neglect which was caused by the unethical actions of the
Plaintiff and its Attorneys .
9. Defendant is in the process of drafting a complaint to be fi led with
the Georgia Bar Association to investigate the ethics of the Plaintiff's
attorney's in dealing with this Defendant.
lO.Other events that occurred to prevent this Defendant from filing
a timely answer, defenses and counterclaim to Plaintiffs Complaint are
as follows :
A) The Email account holding the majority of the evidence
was illegally seized by James Gee and never remitted to
Defendant.
B) After strenuous evidence gather process by Conversion
Executives of the 1000 Plus illegal shareholders names and
the firms that sold them their shares, The Names of the
illegal shareholders were illegally seized by [Eek!] James Gee,
Justin Frazier and John Arlitt to prevent the production of
said evidence to the court. [Eek!]
Case 1:06-cv-02568-CC Document 20 Filed 11/07/2007 Page 4 of 9
WHEREFORE, THE Defendant, RUFUS PAUL HARRIS, a/k/a PAUL
RUFUS HARRIS, MOVES THIS Court to reconsider and vacate the Order
that was entered by this Court on October 301b 2007 for the foregoing reasons
and allow this Defendant to properly-answer Plaintiff's Complaint.
e ~...a
Rufus 1 Harris alk/a
Paul Ru u s Harris
P.O. Box 18
Adairsville, Georgia 30103
Case 1:06-cv-02568-CC Document 20 Filed 11/07/2007 Page 5 of 9
BEFORE ME, the undersigned authority, personally appeared RUFUS
PAUL HARRIS a/k/a PAUL RUFUS HARRIS, who, after first being duly
sworn by me according to law, states that the foregoing facts set forth in the
above Motion For Reconsideration/Rehearing are true and correct to the best
of his knowledge and belief.
NOTARY PUBLIC
0114 F . At L,
STATE N ~
OF
TENNESSEE
NOTARY
~ PUBLIC ~
10
.01
~lllV v" ~
My Commission Expires : I ~ (-Z,t ,c0
I, RUFUS PAUL HARRIS a/k/a PAUL RUFUS HARRIS, after being duly
sworn according to law , do state and affirm, under penalty of perjury, that
the facts set forth in the foregoing Motion for Reconsideration/Rehearing are
true and correct to my best knowledge and belief .
d
Rufus null Harris aIk/a
Paul Rufus Harris
STATEOF County of ~ r~ s
Case 1:06-cv-02568-CC Document 20 Filed 11/07/2007 Page 6 of 9
Office of the Attorney General
State of Georgia
40 Capitol Square, SW
Atlanta, Ga 30334
I HEREBY CERTIFY that a true and correct copy of the foregoing
Motion for Reconsideration/Rehearing has been furnished t o William P
Hicks, Debbie T. Hampton and Alana R Black, Attorney's for Plaintiff, 34 75
Lenox Road, NE, Suite 1000, Atlanta, GA 30326-1232 by U .S. Mail this 5th
day of November, 2008.
~. ~ ~.,
Rufus aul Harris a/k/a
Paul Rufus Harris
[Eek!] Copied to the following ;
United States Attorney General
U.S. Department of Justice
950 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW
Washington, DC 20530-0001 [Eek!]
Case 1:06-cv-02568-CC Document 20 Filed 11/07/2007 Page 7 of 9
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF GEORGIA
ATLANTA DIVISION
Civil Action No.
1 :06-CV-2568-CC
Defendants.
Plaintiff or its Attorneys or unknown third parties and cannot be retrieved in
SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE
COMMISSION,
Plaintiff,
V.
CONVERSION SOLUTIONS HOLDING
CORPORATION and RUFUS PAUL
HARRIS a/k/a PAUL RUFUS HARRIS,
MOTION FOR ENLARGEMENT OF TIME TO
FILE SUPPLEMENTAL AFFIDAVITS
COMES NOW the Defendant, RUFUS PAUL HARRIS, a/k/a PAUL
RUFUS HARRIS, and moves this Court to extend the time period for filing
affidavits and submitting documentation supporting this Motionfor an
additional 60 days, until January 2nd , 2008.
The grounds for this Motion are that the time period set forth in the
Federal Rules of Civil Procedure is insufficient to find witnesses to execute
affidavits or to find and submit other documents and/or evidence supporting
this Defendants Motion .
The needed documents to support this Motion are in the possession of the
Case 1:06-cv-02568-CC Document 20 Filed 11/07/2007 Page 8 of 9
Paul Rufus Harris
a 10 day period from the entry of this Courts Order entered on October 30,
2007.
WHEREFORE, THE Defendant, RUFUS PAUL HARRIS, a/k/a PAUL
RUFUS HARRIS, moves this Court for an enlargement of time, until January
2, 2008, to file supplemental affidavits, documents and/or other evidence to
support the Defendant's Motion for Reconsideration/Rehearing heretofore
filed in this cause
I HEREBY CERTIFY that a true and correct copy of the foregoing
Motion for Enlargement of Time has been furnished to William P Hicks,
Debbie T. Hampton and Alana R Black, Attorney's for Plaintiff, 3475 Lenox
Road, NE, Suite 1000, Atlanta, GA 30326-1232 by U.S. Mail this 5th day of
November, 2008.
f~
Rufus ul Harris a/k/a
Case 1:06-cv-02568-CC Document 20 Filed 11/07/2007 Page 9 of 9


Link to Post - Back to Top Logged
 
Posted by glassman on :
 
Rufus for president ! [Big Grin]
 
Posted by T e x on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by fhalyesss:
So your thoughts now Tex?????
[Eek!] [Eek!] [Eek!] [Eek!]

posturing for some reason...he's gotta know that filing goes nowhere.
 
Posted by glassman on :
 
i said this before, i'll say it again. i listened carefully to Rufus's early interviews and IMO he truly beleives(d) what he was saying...

so is he delusional? could be...
 
Posted by fhalyesss on :
 
Hey Glass,

Thats what i have always said:

He either speaks the truth or he is nuts!!!

I believe the former!!

If you had to gamble the house on it, which way would you go???
 
Posted by T e x on :
 
I've dealt with guys on the street--and in corporate jobs--who get angry when you challenge their story line...cuz you're *supposed* to believe it. The *script* "becomes" the reality...

I don't know enough to know whether shrinks have a label for that...

I'm half a mind to, well...not be surprised, let's say, if it turns out he's skipped down the Hoot Owl Trail...
 
Posted by glassman on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by fhalyesss:
Hey Glass,

Thats what i have always said:

He either speaks the truth or he is nuts!!!

I believe the former!!

If you had to gamble the house on it, which way would you go???

i've never gambled the house on any stock.

every time i see one go to da moon i kick myself, but there's always 50 or a 100 to bring me back to reason [Big Grin]
 
Posted by bilgert on :
 
My vote, although I would love to believe the contrary- and to a certain extent, I respect his apparent conviction.
 -

quote:
Originally posted by fhalyesss:
Hey Glass,

Thats what i have always said:

He either speaks the truth or he is nuts!!!

I believe the former!!

If you had to gamble the house on it, which way would you go???


 
Posted by glassman on :
 
the recent mortgage crisis has made information on how bond trading works more available as people are asking questions.

in theory? rufufu had a good thing if he really owned those bonds...
the SEC says he didn't....

here's a place to read up:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Repurchase_agreement
 
Posted by T e x on :
 
recent? lol... *current*... [Smile]

sure--but that's a huge if. Despite their screw-ups and cronyism, the SEC has the resources to determine whether something's odd about a bond claim.

If it's so convoluted that they need clarification? Makes no sense for a going concern to refuse such clarification.

If the play is designed for the going concern to implode? then it makes sense...
 
Posted by glassman on :
 
if it was designed to implode? then you'd think rufufu would have had a bolt-hole to creep into.. unless he didn't know... which is quite possible.

when this thing hit, i had a vague idea of how the bond market works... now? i have a slightly less vague idea LOL....
 
Posted by glassman on :
 
also Tex? we never could figure out how the big bonds came to be in rufuf's possession which was a red flag...

i always assumed it was somebody trying to move money in the the US from offshore in a "legal maneuver" that only lawyers understand... [Confused]

i have seen people transfer timberland around into different shells, (i assume) to avoid inheritance taxes..
those companies were never worth trading tho.
 
Posted by T e x on :
 
Urban myth? I dunno... but I like it..."rings" true to me, knowing the border a bit:

Guy heads for Mexico from Texas on a bike. He's got saddlebags, panniers, whatever...He stops short of the checkpoint and empties his bags. It's sand...makes a nice little hill of sand, from each bag. He rides up to the checkpoint, where he's held while they send a guy to check the lil hills: it's just sand.

So they let him through.

This goes on every day... same procedure.

Finally, they realize...he's smuggling stolen bicycles...

As mentioned, wouldn't surprise me hugely if this latest filing ain't nuthin' more than a pile of sand...
 
Posted by T e x on :
 
Also, glass?

unless he didn't know... which is quite possible.

is possible he didn't know what?

Corey? the bond claims? the moon base? the Vatican?
 
Posted by a surfer on :
 
B) After strenuous evidence gather process by Conversion
Executives of the 1000 Plus illegal shareholders names and
the firms that sold them their shares, The Names of the
illegal shareholders were illegally seized by James Gee,
Justin Frazier and John Arlitt to prevent the production of
said evidence to the court.


So these guys took the company over via shareholder committee in the dying moments to seize info. to protect themselves while screwing the real shareholders into submission......

And they would of gotten away with it had it not been for those medeling kids


sounds like a scooby doo episode.


This will go on for 2 more years IMO.

Go Rufus.
 
Posted by thesource on :
 
This guys wasting his time ...... He still cannot represent the company himself . If the company is broke , thats its problem not the SEC's or the Courts . Remember who was the one that wanted this to go to court so all could be on record .........

Way to fumble the ball you freakin moron . Dufus would make a good president , just not in a country I'd want to live in .
 
Posted by thesource on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by a surfer:

sounds like a scooby doo episode.


This will go on for 2 more years IMO.

Go Rufus.

Ruh Roh ..........
 
Posted by T e x on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by a surfer:
B) After strenuous evidence gather process by Conversion
Executives of the 1000 Plus illegal shareholders names and
the firms that sold them their shares, The Names of the
illegal shareholders were illegally seized by James Gee,
Justin Frazier and John Arlitt to prevent the production of
said evidence to the court.


So these guys took the company over via shareholder committee in the dying moments to seize info. to protect themselves while screwing the real shareholders into submission......

And they would of gotten away with it had it not been for those medeling kids


sounds like a scooby doo episode.


This will go on for 2 more years IMO.

Go Rufus.

lol, wasn't even gonna go there--

quote:
The Names of the
illegal shareholders were illegally seized by James Gee,

too funny...forget the "seizure" for the moment: what in THE WORLD is an ILLEGAL SHAREHOLDER?
 
Posted by glassman on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by thesource:
This guys wasting his time ...... He still cannot represent the company himself . If the company is broke , thats its problem not the SEC's or the Courts . Remember who was the one that wanted this to go to court so all could be on record .........

Way to fumble the ball you freakin moron . Dufus would make a good president , just not in a country I'd want to live in .

i try not to get too political outside of off-topic.. it's just that Rufufu reminds of all the politicians who keep saying they are innocent until they are convicted dead to rights.. and even then? they still claim innocence...

whos that senator that has "wide stance" LOL....

if you ask me? scooby doo is a lot more entertaining than most of these bozo's (rufufu included)

when people say the penniestocks are all crooked? they are ignoring more than half the crooks in the market... [Roll Eyes]
 
Posted by T e x on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by glassman:
quote:
Originally posted by thesource:
This guys wasting his time ...... He still cannot represent the company himself . If the company is broke , thats its problem not the SEC's or the Courts . Remember who was the one that wanted this to go to court so all could be on record .........

Way to fumble the ball you freakin moron . Dufus would make a good president , just not in a country I'd want to live in .

i try not to get too political outside of off-topic.. it's just that Rufufu reminds of all the politicians who keep saying they are innocent until they are convicted dead to rights.. and even then? they still claim innocence...

whos that senator that has "wide stance" LOL....

if you ask me? scooby doo is a lot more entertaining than most of these bozo's (rufufu included)

when people say the penniestocks are all crooked? they are ignoring more than half the crooks in the market... [Roll Eyes]

still not following:

unless he didn't know... which is quite possible.
 
Posted by thesource on :
 
Damn I was really hoping the FBI would come in by now and put this POS out of its misery . Oh well I guess atleast Dufus admitted the company was broke and couldn't afford a lawyer . So much for them having one and so on .
 
Posted by glassman on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by T e x:
still not following:

unless he didn't know... which is quite possible.

i just meant that somehow rufufu was scammed, and beleives that he had what he said he did...
 
Posted by T e x on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by glassman:
quote:
Originally posted by T e x:
still not following:

unless he didn't know... which is quite possible.

i just meant that somehow rufufu was scammed, and beleives that he had what he said he did...
given the filings, how could that be so? You and I both were hot tamale on the loan being swept under the rug...

Please construct a scenario in which Harris is unaware.
 
Posted by glassman on :
 
well, let's say he has an IQ of 90, and somebody convinced him he actually has the bonds?

are you asking me if he didn't know maybe somebody was pushing the envelop on the legality of transferring the bonds?

they were supposedly Venzualan, which as we know has some serious political BS associated with it...

all i can do is speculate... most scammers disappear into the woodwork pretty quick. he's actually drawing more and more attention to himself... like OJ... that seems to me to mean he's either telling the truth as he sees it (delusional or not), or he's mentally ill.....
 
Posted by glassman on :
 
as for the loan being swept under the rug? they deliberately broke the terms of the financing deal by "buying back" stock. that was clearly forbidden in the PIPE and they only bought back a few shares. then they announced it. that was a maneuver of some sort to break the contract...
 
Posted by Mr. CATIAEngineer on :
 
Hmmmm, interesting filing. He truly believes in everything he is out to accomplish IMO. Its not my opinion that matters though I suppose......Judge Cooper? What say you?
 
Posted by T e x on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by glassman:
well, let's say he has an IQ of 90, and somebody convinced him he actually has the bonds?

are you asking me if he didn't know maybe somebody was pushing the envelop on the legality of transferring the bonds?

they were supposedly Venzualan, which as we know has some serious political BS associated with it...

all i can do is speculate... most scammers disappear into the woodwork pretty quick. he's actually drawing more and more attention to himself... like OJ... that seems to me to mean he's either telling the truth as he sees it (delusional or not), or he's mentally ill.....

good post...

re: "disappear," though...look how long PLNI and GTEL/GTE(amex)/GTEM ran the smokescreen...

not buying that, lol

Basically, you're positing Harris as either a dimwit or some sort of "nut" however we might term that, correctly.

yes?
 
Posted by T e x on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by glassman:
as for the loan being swept under the rug? they deliberately broke the terms of the financing deal by "buying back" stock. that was clearly forbidden in the PIPE and they only bought back a few shares. then they announced it. that was a maneuver of some sort to break the contract...

refresh my memory...

agreed on "breaking the contract" but can not remember the details, off hand
 
Posted by wallymac on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by T e x:
quote:
Originally posted by glassman:
quote:
Originally posted by T e x:
still not following:

unless he didn't know... which is quite possible.

i just meant that somehow rufufu was scammed, and beleives that he had what he said he did...
given the filings, how could that be so? You and I both were hot tamale on the loan being swept under the rug...

Please construct a scenario in which Harris is unaware.

Who made the real killing here? Well if you look at it, Mike Alexander and friends.

In the scenario, which I fully admit is total conjecture without at this point exonerating Rufus, AJW(Corey Robiski and friends) made a ton on this play. In fact I would even surmise that they were responsible for much of the shorting that has been bandied about since they do have the offshore to accomplish this. I have seen a few plays that they are/have been involved in and it's always the same. PPS rises then crashes then rise and crashes.

So they find a cohort that counterfeits the bonds and presents them to an egomaniac that believes he knows the bond market because he studied it on the internet. In fact they may even own some real bonds and use them to fortify the validity of the bonds in question. Rufus, the egomaniac, takes the bait hook line and sinker. He believes that he is smarter then everyone. They keep giving him more and more rope and he hangs himself. The catch is that he truly believes that he created the scenario and has them by the B--ls. He still believes it. But in reality they played him just like a fiddle. In fact they even hire a Canadian promoter that goes by an Egyptian name, get Steven Canady/Mr. Salki, know scammer's to add additional bonds to the pie and then leak info to Tim Miles and the NY Post. Why Miles and the Post? Easy neither has total creditability so the PPS will be volatile and give them multiple chances to make money.
.

What is the rule of thumb? Follow the money. Obviously Rufus doesn't have it, the SEC may never figure it out and what about the 50M shares that were gifted by Mike Alexander to an unknown party?

IMO, the more I think about it Rufus's nickname should be Rufus the DupeAss.

All of the above is pure conjecture nothing less and nothing more.

Wally
 
Posted by T e x on :
 
If Harris got duped, seems like he would cooperate with authorities rather than continuing the "Oz" charade...
 
Posted by glassman on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by T e x:
If Harris got duped, seems like he would cooperate with authorities rather than continuing the "Oz" charade...

once again Tex, i respectfully suggest you are giving him too much credit.

the people who are successful scammers LOOK REAL HARD for people with ego issues. ego issue that make people (victims) unwilling to admit they are wrong, and have been tricked, even when it is shoved down their throats. there's lots of 'em.. that's why i made the rufufu for president comment...
 
Posted by T e x on :
 
So you think the payday was pretty well split along "company lines" ? ie, FHALsters divvy up MA's rake, while CSVUers hold da bag?

What about Dabbs, in that scenario? If that's the case, I would think some sort of "consultant's fee" would apply...

Also, given said scenario, Harris was too slow/ignorant/whatever to notice Corey's loan--and *his* not calling in the loan?
 
Posted by glassman on :
 
i haven't sorted out Corey yet.

Sabra Dabbs? we'll just have to watch her in action to find out what she does next. i won't be playing anything i know she is in on anytime soon.
 
Posted by T e x on :
 
http://investorshub.*********/boards/board.asp?board_id=10980

some good Corey court cases showing up there, some he's filed and some against. Am hoping it becomes a solid thread. Anyway, legal pro/con--good to "get a read" on his mindset/tactics, etc...

[ November 10, 2007, 20:38: Message edited by: T e x ]
 
Posted by Ocqueoc on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by glassman:
i haven't sorted out Corey yet.

Sabra Dabbs? we'll just have to watch her in action to find out what she does next. i won't be playing anything i know she is in on anytime soon.

That makes two of us!
 
Posted by glassman on :
 
it seems to me that the PIPE deal has something to do with the naked shorts.

i've searched far and wide, but i've never been able to find out exactly how they create the naked shorts...
even superior stock pickers like the motley fool were unable to decipher how it works for along time, then they started doing shorting themselves, so i suppose they figgered it out.

i suppose there must be a couple of ways to do it, but "toxic financing" seems to be one of the no-lose plays in the market...

death spiral convertibles is what the old-timers called it...

Death-spiral convertibles are privately held preferred stock or bonds that can be exchanged for shares of common stock. An investor will offer a company cash in exchange for a percentage of the company, but with a catch: The investor wants a guarantee that the investment's value won't fall (or won't fall much). If the stock does fall, the investor gets more shares -- and a bigger stake in the company.

If Acme's shares rise, the vulture capitalist keeps 30 percent of the business and makes money. [See chart.] But Let's say the stock price is cut in half-which means, of course, that the value of the company is cut in half. By the terms of this death-spiral convert, the vulture's stake cannot fall below $25 million. So instantly, a pile of new shares is handed over to the vulture capitalist, and his stake rises to 50 percent. And if the stock ever recovers, he'll still own half of Acme.com.


http://findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_m0HWW/is_11_4/ai_71886195
 
Posted by wallymac on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by glassman:
it seems to me that the PIPE deal has something to do with the naked shorts.

i've searched far and wide, but i've never been able to find out exactly how they create the naked shorts...
even superior stock pickers like the motley fool were unable to decipher how it works for along time, then they started doing shorting themselves, so i suppose they figgered it out.

i suppose there must be a couple of ways to do it, but "toxic financing" seems to be one of the no-lose plays in the market...

death spiral convertibles is what the old-timers called it...

Death-spiral convertibles are privately held preferred stock or bonds that can be exchanged for shares of common stock. An investor will offer a company cash in exchange for a percentage of the company, but with a catch: The investor wants a guarantee that the investment's value won't fall (or won't fall much). If the stock does fall, the investor gets more shares -- and a bigger stake in the company.

If Acme's shares rise, the vulture capitalist keeps 30 percent of the business and makes money. [See chart.] But Let's say the stock price is cut in half-which means, of course, that the value of the company is cut in half. By the terms of this death-spiral convert, the vulture's stake cannot fall below $25 million. So instantly, a pile of new shares is handed over to the vulture capitalist, and his stake rises to 50 percent. And if the stock ever recovers, he'll still own half of Acme.com.


http://findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_m0HWW/is_11_4/ai_71886195

AJW is involved with a company that I followed over the past year RKLC. If you look at the filing for the financing this is part of what you see.

"On March 3, 2006, we completed financing agreements by executing a securities purchase agreement with the following entities: AJW Partners, LLC, AJW Offshore, Ltd., AJW Qualified Partners, LLC and New Millenium Capital Partners II, LLC. Under the securities purchase agreement, we will issue up to $2,000,000 in callable secured convertible notes. The notes are convertible into shares of our common stock. The conversion price is based on the average applicable percentage of the average of the lowest three (3) Trading Prices for the Common Stock during the twenty (20) Trading Day period prior to conversion. The “Applicable Percentage” means 50%; provided, however, that the Applicable Percentage shall be increased to (i) 55% in the event that a Registration Statement is filed within thirty days of the closing and (ii) 60% in the event that the Registration Statement becomes effective within one hundred and twenty days from the Closing. The timing of the conversion is at the option of the holder. The notes are secured by a grant of a general security interest in all of our assets both tangible and intangible. The Company simultaneously issued to the private investors seven year warrants to purchase 3,000,000 Series A warrants at an exercise price of $1.00 and 3,000,000 Series B warrants at an exercise price of $1.50"

http://www.otcbb.com/asp/Info_Center.asp

Now if you look at the chart from that time to now.

http://stockcharts.com/h-sc/ui?s=RKLC&p=D&yr=2&mn=0&dy=0&id=p72400251546


It's my belief that they use the Offshore portion to short the stock, driving the PPS down. They know that they will receive more shares the lower the PPS goes so they are borrowing against stock that do not yet possess. So they make the money on the way down and buy/or are issued the stock after the fact.

At least that is what I believe they do.

Wally
 
Posted by T e x on :
 
yup...

coming & going

sell into the run...short once it tops.

If the company wrecks? even better
 
Posted by wallymac on :
 
It would be interesting to see if any company has ever done well after getting involved with AJW. My guess is that none have.

I know that I would not touch a stock anymore that has any association with AJW.

Wally
 
Posted by T e x on :
 
lol...

you can touch 'em...just don't be hugging [Smile]
 
Posted by Stockstar69 on :
 
OK, what did I miss? Looking at the court info...it looks like what I said months ago. How can Rufus defend himself and/or the company if he was fired/replaced/rehired, etc. etc. several times? Somebody may have hid something but it may not have been Rufus.

Let go back to the beginning...We have billions in bonds somewhere. [Eek!]
 
Posted by NEL on :
 
I'm hoping to make back some of my CSHD loses with FFBU, anyone else in this? OTCBB reverse merger Shell company owned by Joseph Meuse. (I bought $500 worth at .008 today up to .07)
FWIW
 
Posted by T e x on :
 
NEL, called it as a day-runner.

You seen our thread?
 
Posted by thesource on :
 
very nice NEL ......
 
Posted by NEL on :
 
Tex, seen it been watching and doing DD closely.
 
Posted by T e x on :
 
atta gurl.

lol, not much DD, over there...

we shout em, and either hit em or don't [Big Grin]

sometimes, they keep going, though
 
Posted by NEL on :
 
wow, just reading all the latest crepe on this over at hot stock, yikes sounds like a novel
 
Posted by trade04 on :
 
wow u guys really having a BALL with this huh lol
 
Posted by TimW on :
 
I'm still waiting since september for my broker to produce some certificates for me.

*shrug*
 
Posted by BooDog on :
 
Just fyi. I saw this when it was doing a RS. BTON to BRIT in the RS thread (still not able to trade yet - could be me) BUT ANYWAY.... John Arlitt was sponsoring this a bit last year as a buyer. BRIT is a jewelry entity up in Canada britton.com. The way it looks they haven't been doing anything with it for about a year. Something to keep a third eye on. Thought I'd put it here for the Arlitt fans. Not sure if he is still assosiated with britton or not.
 
Posted by Ocqueoc on :
 
For Mr.C

HAPPY BIRTHDAY TO YOU
HAPPY BIRTHDAY TO YOU
MAY THE GOOD LORD BLESS YOU
HAPPY BIRTHDAY , HAPPY BIRTHDAY
HAPPY BIRTHDAY TO YOU

ALL our love , Mom and Dad
 
Posted by Ocqueoc on :
 
Boodog,
As far as I know there is no Tut fans here, but I could be wrong.
 
Posted by BooDog on :
 
I doubt there are ANY cshd fans left. Just saw the connection with him and Jacek Oscilowicz. Following the money so to speak.
 
Posted by Ocqueoc on :
 
FYI

I see the sec filed a motion today (on pacer)
I'm sorry, I don't know how to cut and paste [Roll Eyes] or I'd put it here.

I know, Tex, I should know by now but I forgot LOL
 
Posted by wallymac on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by Ocqueoc:
FYI

I see the sec filed a motion today (on pacer)
I'm sorry, I don't know how to cut and paste [Roll Eyes] or I'd put it here.

I know, Tex, I should know by now but I forgot LOL

Here you go:


PACER UPDATE

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF GEORGIA

ATLANTA DIVISION

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE
COMMISSION,
Plaintiff,

Civil Action No.

v.

1:06-CV-2568-CC

CONVERSION SOLUTIONS
HOLDING CORPORATION and
RUFUS PAUL HARRIS a/k/a
PAUL RUFUS HARRIS,

Defendants.


MOTION FOR DEFAULT JUDGMENT

AND SUPPORTING MEMORANDUM OF LAW


Plaintiff, Securities and Exchange Commission (“Commission”) hereby
moves for a default judgment against both Defendant Rufus Paul Harris a/k/a Paul
Rufus Harris (“Harris”) and Defendant Conversion Solutions Holding Corporation
(“Conversion”), pursuant to Rule 55 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. In
support of its motion, Plaintiff submits the following memorandum of law.

PROCEDURAL HISTORY

The relevant facts are straightforward. The Complaint in this matter
was filed on October 24, 2006. On November 4, 2006, Harris was served with the

Summons and Complaint, along with other associated documents. Harris’s
Answer to the Complaint was thus due to be filed not later than November 24,
2006.

Conversion was served with the Summons and Complaint, along with other
associated documents, through its registered agent for service of process, Harvard
Business Services of Lewes, Delaware, on October 26, 2006. Conversion’s
Answer to the Complaint was thus due to be filed not later than November 15,
2006.

On November 16, 2006, Plaintiff filed the returns of service of process for
both Harris and Conversion with the Court. Thereafter, on November 16, 2006,
Plaintiff applied to the Clerk for an entry of default as to Conversion. On
November 17, 2006, the Clerk entered a default as to Conversion. On November
28, 2006, Plaintiff applied to the Clerk for an entry of default as to Harris. On
November 29, 2006, the Clerk entered a default as to Harris.

On April 24, 2007, Harris filed with the Court a document styled “Defendant
Conversion Solutions Holding’s Answer and Defenses to Complaint for Injunctive
and Other Relief”. On May 11, 2007, Plaintiff moved to strike this Answer.
Subsequently, on May 15, 2007, Harris moved that the Clerk’s entry of default be
set aside and filed another Answer. On October 30, 2007, the Court granted

Plaintiff’s motion to strike the Answer and denied Harris’s motion to set aside the
entry of default as to himself individually and as to Conversion. On November 7,
2007, Harris filed a “Motion for Reconsideration/Rehearing of the Court’s October
30, 2007 Order Entered by This Court” and a related Motion for Enlargement of
Time to File Supplemental Affidavits. In a separate pleading filed
contemporaneously with this motion, Plaintiff opposes Harris’s motions for
reconsideration of the Court’s October 30, 2007 Order and for Enlargement of
Time.

ARGUMENT

A. ENTRY OF A DEFAULT JUDGMENT IS APPROPRIATE

Entry of a judgment by default is appropriate against both Defendants Harris
and Conversion. Defaults have been entered by the Clerk. Accordingly, the
factual allegations of the Complaint, except for those relating to damages, are taken
as true. 10 C. Wright, A. Miller & M. Kane, Federal Practice and Procedure, §
2688, p. 412 (2d ed. 1983); Thomson v. Wooster, 5 S.Ct. 788 (1885).

B.
FACTUAL ALLEGATIONS

The allegations of the Complaint, which are accepted as true with regard to
both defendants in accordance with the previous entries of default, include the
following:

1.
Conversion is a publicly-trading company with its principal place of
business in Kennesaw, Georgia. Conversion was incorporated in Delaware under
the name Conversion Solutions, Inc., on February 11, 2005. Conversion purports
to be a “diversified holdings company which was formed to originate, fund and
source funding for asset-based transactions in the private market.”


2.
Conversion’s stock was quoted publicly on the OTC Bulletin Board
under the symbol “CSHD,” “CSHDE” or “CDSH.OB” between August 2006 and
the filing of the Complaint October 24, 2006.


3.
Harris, a resident of Adairsville, Georgia, was the chief executive
officer of Conversion at all relevant times through the filing of the Complaint on
October 24, 2006. According to Conversion’s most recent Form 10-K, Harris has
facilitated and originated projects, corporate and bond financing for more than 10
years, with experiences ranging from high-end corporate financing to bond
origination.


4.
In September and October 2006, Conversion issued a series of press
releases, and filed with the Commission a current report and an amended current
report on Form 8-K and 8-K/A, respectively, an annual report on Form 10-KSB
and two amended annual reports on Forms 10-KSB/A, all of which fraudulently
overstated Conversion’s assets.


5.
On September 26, 2006, Conversion filed a Form 8-K (“September 26
Form 8-K”) with the Commission using Harris’ electronic signature.


6.
The September 26 Form 8-K stated that Conversion’s “Board of
Directors has approved a contract extension with the Caracas Group and accepted
into its Asset Management Portfolio an additional 5 Billion Euro denominated
Global Bonds on the Republic of Venezuela with an 11% annual coupon.” This
statement was false.
 
Posted by wallymac on :
 
7.
The September 26 Form 8-K further stated that the bond had been
loaded in the Euroclear system with an international security identification number
of DE0006106875 and a Common Code of 012481241.


8.
The sole exhibit to the September 26 Form 8-K was a press release
from Conversion dated September 25 making substantively identical claims.


9.
The identifying codes noted in the September 26 Form 8-K and the
attached September 25, 2006 press release correspond to a €700 million bond
series issued by Venezuela, not a €5 billion series.


10.
On the morning of September 27, 2006, Conversion and Harris
issued a press release paraphrasing and restating the same claim (“September 27 €5
Billion Venezuelan Bond Press Release”). It stated that “an additional 5 Billion


Euro denominated Global Bonds on the Republic of Venezuela with a [sic] 11%
annual coupon has been added to Conversion’s Asset Management Portfolio.”


11. Conversion does not own, or manage as an asset, the entire €700
million bond series issued by Venezuela corresponding the to the identifying codes
listed in the September 26 Form 8-K, the September 25, 2006 press release
attached to it, and the September 27 €5 Billion Venezuelan Bond Press Release.


12.
In fact, there has been trading activity in the €700 million
Venezuelan bond issue in question during the period Conversion claims to have
owned it.
13.
Also on the morning of September 27, 2006, Conversion and Harris
issued a second press release, titled “Conversion Solutions Announce the
Completion of the Banking Platform for Our Global, Sovereign and Institutional
Investors” (“September 27 Banking Platform Press Release”).


14.
The press release stated that Conversion had “obtained contracts
from . . . Deutche [sic] Bank, ABN Amro Bank, Dresdner Bank and Kommerce
[sic] Bank” and that “the mentioned banks will be the foundation for our projected
funding platform.”


15.
The September 27 Banking Platform Press Release contained
material misstatements of fact, or at least was misleading. On information and


belief, Deutsche Bank does not have any contract with Conversion, with the
possible exception of an ordinary bank account relationship.


16.
On September 29, 2006, Conversion filed an amended current report
under Form 8-K/A (“September 29 Form 8-K/A”) with the Commission. Audited
financial statements for the period ended June 30, 2006 were annexed to the
September 29 Form 8-K/A.


17.
In the financial statements, Conversion listed assets including a long-
term investment in bonds valued at $500 million. Note 12 to the financial
statements explained that, on March 15, 2006, Conversion “acquired full
ownership of Global Bonds issued through the Republic of Venezuela with an
issuance date of July 31, 1998 and a maturity date of August 15, 2018. The
principal amount of the bonds is $500,000,000 USD with a fixed interest rate of
13.625%, computed on a semi-annual basis.” Note 12 went on to give the
Common and international security identification numbers for the bonds and stated
that the bonds had been acquired on March 15, 2006.


18. Conversion’s claim to have acquired the entire series of $500 million
Venezuela 13 5/8% bonds on March 15, 2006 and to have held them through June
30, 2006, is false.

19.
Some, and possibly all, of the $500 million Venezuelan bond issue
was owned by entities other than Conversion during the relevant time period. In
fact, there has been trading activity in the $500 million Venezuelan bond issue
during the period Conversion claims to have owned it. Moreover, a substantial
portion of the $500 million bond issue, approximately $39 million, has been owned
by corporate affiliates of FMR Co. (Fidelity Investments) during the relevant
period.


20.
On October 16, 2006, Conversion filed an annual report on Form 10-
KSB with the Commission.


21.
On October 17 and 19, 2006, Conversion filed amended annual
reports on Forms 10-KSB/A with the Commission.


22.
With regard to the $500 million Venezuelan bond issue, the audited
financial statements attached to these forms were essentially identical to those
incorporated in the September 29 Form 8-K/A discussed above.


23.
Thus, Conversion’s claim to have acquired the entire series of $500
million Venezuela 13 5/8% bonds on March 15, 2006 and held them through June
30, 2006, was repeated in the October 16 Form 10-KSB and the October 17 and 19
Forms 10-KSB/A.


24.
Trading activity in Conversion’s stock increased dramatically after the
two September 27 press releases were issued.


25.
On Tuesday, September 26, Conversion’s stock closed at a price of
$1.01 per share on a volume of 498,303 shares traded.


26.
On September 27, the stock closed at $1.75 per share on a volume of
4,932,180 shares, an increase of over 73% in price and almost 890% in trading
volume.


27.
The effect of the fraudulent releases continued into Thursday,
September 28, when Conversion’s stock closed at $3.02 per share on a volume of
14,037,728 shares traded. The price and volume remained above the September 26
levels through the date of the Complaint, October 24, 2006.


28.
As described above, Conversion and Harris, in connection with the
purchase or sale of securities, directly or indirectly employed devices, schemes, or
artifices to defraud; made untrue statements of material facts or omitted to state
material facts necessary in order to make the statements made, in the light of the
circumstances under which they were made, not misleading; or engaged in acts,
practices, or courses of business which operated as a fraud or deceit.


29.
Conversion and Harris knowingly, intentionally and/or recklessly
engaged in the conduct described above.

30.
While engaging in the above courses of conduct, Conversion and
Harris, directly or indirectly, made use of the mails, or means or instruments of
transportation or communication in interstate commerce, or means or
instrumentalities of interstate commerce.

31.
By reason of the foregoing, Conversion and Harris violated or are
about to violate, and unless restrained and enjoined, will continue to violate
Section 10(b) the Exchange Act [15 U.S.C. § 78j(b)] and Rule 10b-5 thereunder
[17 C.F.R. § 240.10b-5].


32.
Defendant Conversion, from September through October 19, 2006
violated Section 13(a) of the Exchange Act and Rules 12b-20, 13a-1 and 13a-11
thereunder, by filing current and periodic reports (specifically, its September 26
and 29, 2006 Forms 8-K and 8-K/A, its October 16, 2006 Form 10-KSB, and its
October 17 and 19, 2006 Forms 10-KSB/A) which: 1) were materially misleading,
or 2) which failed to include such further material information as would have been
necessary to make the statements not misleading.


33.
Defendant Harris, from September 2006 through October 19, 2006,
aided and abetted Conversion’s violations of Section 13(a) of the Exchange Act
and Rules 12b-20, 13a-1 and 13a-11 thereunder, which occurred when Conversion
filed current and periodic reports (specifically, its September 26 and 29, 2006


Forms 8-K and 8-K/A, its October 16, 2006 Form 10-KSB, and its October 17 and
19, 2006 Forms 10-KSB/A) which: 1) were materially misleading; or 2) which
failed to include such further material information as would have been necessary to
make the statements not misleading. Through the conduct described in the above
paragraphs, Harris knowingly substantially assisted Conversion’s violations of this
section and rules.


34.
Defendant Harris knowingly signed certifications which were
included in current and periodic reports that Conversion filed with the Commission
pursuant to Section 13(a) of the Exchange Act [15 U.S.C. §§78m(a)] which
contained untrue statements of material fact.


35.
By reason of the foregoing, Harris violated Rule 13a-14 [17 C.F.R. §
240.13a-14].


C.
VIOLATIONS


1. Harris and Conversion Committed Securities Fraud


Section 10(b) of the Exchange Act [15 U.S.C. § 78j(b)] and Rule 10b-5
thereunder [17 C.F.R. § 240.10b-5] prohibit fraudulent conduct in connection with
the purchase and sale of securities. To prove violations based on
misrepresentations or omissions, the Commission must show that the
misrepresentations or omissions were material. SEC v. Texas Gulf Sulphur Co.,


401 F.2d 833 (2d Cir. 1968), cert. denied sub nom., 394 U.S. 976 (1969), reh’g
denied, 404 U.S. 1064 (1972). A misrepresentation or omission is material if there
is a substantial likelihood that under all circumstances it would have assumed
actual significance in the deliberations of a reasonable investor. Basic, Inc. v.
Levinson, 485 U.S. 224 (1988); TSC Indust., Inc. v. Northway, Inc., 426 U.S. 438
(1976).

The misrepresentations made by Conversion and Harris were material.
Conversion and Harris have claimed falsely that Conversion has billions of dollars
worth of assets. The sharp increase in the trading activity of Conversion’s stock after
the September 27 press releases were issued, when it increased in price and trading
volume by over 73% and almost 890% over the previous day’s closing figures, also
reflects the materiality of the false and misleading information that was provided to
the market.

The Commission must also establish that the defendants acted with scienter to
prove violations of Section 17(a)(1) of the Securities Act, Section 10(b) of the
Exchange Act and Rule 10b-5. Aaron v. SEC, 446 U.S. 680 (1980). In the Eleventh
Circuit, scienter may be shown by "severe recklessness," defined as "those highly
unreasonable omissions or misrepresentations that involve not merely simple or even
inexcusable negligence, but an extreme departure from the standards of ordinary care, and that present a danger of misleading buyers or sellers which is either known to the
defendant or is so obvious that the defendant must have been aware of it." McDonald
v. Alan Bush Brokerage Co., 863 F.2d 809, 814 (11th Cir. 1989).
__________________
 
Posted by wallymac on :
 
Scienter is clearly present here. The repeated and outlandish nature of the
misleading statements by Conversion and Harris shows recklessness, if not outright
knowledge of the falsity of their claims. Harris controls Conversion. Accordingly, his
scienter is imputed to it. SEC v. Manor Nursing Centers, Inc., 458 F. 2d 1082, fn18
(2d Cir. 1972).

2.
Conversion Violated Reporting Provisions


Section 13(a) of the Exchange Act and Rules 13a-1 and 13a-11 thereunder
require certain issuers to file with the Commission annual and current reports
containing, among other things, financial statements prepared in conformity with the
requirements of the Commission's rules and regulations. In addition, Rule 12b-20
under the Exchange Act requires that such reports contain, in addition to disclosures
expressly required by statute and rules, such other information as is necessary to
ensure that the statements made in those reports are not, under the circumstances,
materially misleading. The requirement that an issuer file reports under Section 13(a)
embodies the requirement that such reports be true and correct. See SEC v. Savoy
Industries, Inc., 587 F.2d 1149, 1165 (D.C. Cir. 1978). Regulation S-X provides that


financial statements not prepared in conformity with GAAP are presumed to be
inaccurate. 17 C.F.R. § 210.4-01(a)(1).

Conversion violated Section 13(a) and Rules 12b-20, 13a-1 and 13a-11 on five
separate occasions, when it filed current reports on Forms 8-K and 8-K/A on
September 26 and 29, 2006, and annual reports on Forms 10-KSB and 10-KSB/A on
October 16, 17, and 19, 2006 containing the material misstatements discussed above.

3.
Harris Aided and Abetted Conversion’s Reporting Violations


Section 20(e) of the Exchange Act defines “aiding and abetting” to include
rendering substantial assistance in the violation. Harris aided and abetted
Conversion’s violations of Section 13(a) of the Exchange Act by knowingly
recording fictitious assets on the company’s financial statements, and by otherwise
describing fictitious assets in those reports. He did this on five separate occasions,
corresponding with Conversion’s filing of the Forms 8-K and 8-K/A filed on
September 26 and 29, 2006, and the annual reports on Forms 10-KSB and 10-KSB/A
filed on October 16, 17, and 19, 2006.

4.
Harris Falsely Certified Reports


Exchange Act Rule 13a-14 requires principal executive and financial
officers to certify in quarterly and annual Commission filings that, among other


things, they have read the filing; that it does not contain any untrue statements, or
omissions, of material facts; that the filing fairly presents the financial condition
and results of operations and cash flows of the issuer; and that they have disclosed
to the audit committee and auditors all significant deficiencies of internal controls
of the company. Harris violated Rule 13a-14 on three separate occasions, when he
knowingly certified the fraudulent financial statements included in Conversion’s
Forms 10-KSB and 10-KSB/A filed on October 16, 17, and 19, 2006.
__________________

D.
INJUNCTIVE AND RELIEF IS APPROPRIATE


In analyzing the need for injunctive relief, courts focus on whether there is a
reasonable likelihood that the defendant, if not enjoined, will engage in future illegal
conduct. See, e.g., SEC v. Bonastia, 614 F.2d 908 (3d Cir. 1980); SEC v.
Commonwealth Chemical Securities, Inc., 574 F.2d 90, 100-101 (2d Cir. 1978).

In determining the likelihood of future violations, the totality of the circumstances
is to be considered. SEC v. Murphy, 626 F.2d 633, 655 (9th Cir. 1980). In granting or
denying injunctive relief, courts have considered the following factors:

1. the egregiousness of the violations;

2. the isolated or repeated nature of the violations;

3. the degree of scienter involved;

4. the sincerity of the defendant's assurances, if any, against future violations;


5. the defendant's recognition of the wrongful nature of his conduct;

6. the likelihood that the defendant's occupation will present opportunities (or
lack thereof) for future violations; and

7. the defendant's age and health.

In this case, permanent injunctive relief is appropriate because Harris
orchestrated a massive fraudulent scheme through Conversion’s false press releases
and Commission filings. The misconduct occurred on a repeated basis, even in the
short time period (less than one month) charged in the Complaint. Moreover, it is
clear from Harris’s comments in open court and from his pleadings that he still does
not recognize, or at least does not acknowledge, the wrongful nature of his conduct.
Still in his thirties and with no apparent means of support but for future fraudulent
activity, Harris poses a significant danger of additional violations. As discussed in
paragraph G, below, Plaintiff is requesting a hearing on this motion in which to
present evidence of the substantial harm caused to numerous investors by Harrris’s
and Conversion’s actions.

E.
HARRIS SHOULD BE BARRED FROM ACTING AS AN OFFICER
OR DIRECTOR IN THE FUTURE


In light of the egregiousness of Harris’s fraud, this Court should issue an
Order pursuant to Section 21(d)(2) of the Exchange Act [15 U.S.C.§ 78u(d)(2)]
permanently prohibiting Harris from acting as an officer or director of any issuer


that has a class of securities registered with the Commission pursuant to Section 12
of the Exchange Act [15 U.S.C. § 78l] or that is required to file reports with the
Commission pursuant to Section 15(d) of the Exchange Act [15 U.S.C.§ 78o(d)].

F.
CIVIL PENALTIES SHOULD BE IMPOSED


In addition, Section 20(d) of the Securities Act and Section 21(d)(3) of the
Exchange Act provide that the Commission may seek to have a court impose civil
penalties. First tier penalties for violations arising after February 14, 2005 may be
imposed up to the larger of $6,500 for a natural person or $65,000 for any other
person, or the amount of ill-gotten gain. When the violation involves fraud, second
tier penalties may be imposed up to $65,000 for a natural person or $325,000 for
any other person. A “third tier” civil penalty of up to the larger of $130,000 for a
natural person or $650,000 for any other person, or the amount of ill-gotten gain
may be imposed when any provision of the Securities Act or the Exchange Act is
violated, if the violation involved fraud or deceit and the violation resulted in
substantial losses or created a significant risk of substantial losses to other persons.
See 17 C.F.R. § 201.1003.

The SEC requests that the Court order Harris and Conversion to pay
substantial civil penalties in amounts determined by the Court to be appropriate. As
discussed above, their violations clearly involved fraud and deceit. In addition,


their violations resulted in very substantial losses to many, many investors, as
Plaintiff will demonstrate through evidence to be presented in the hearing it has
requested on this motion. Harris was the chief architect of Conversion’s fraud, and
the person it acted through in making every misrepresentation charged in the
Complaint. Harris clearly acted with scienter. As Conversion’s chief executive
officer at all relevant times, his state of mind is imputed to the company. See
Armstrong, Jones & Co. v. SEC, 421 F.2d 359, 362 (6th Cir.), cert. denied, 398
U.S. 958 (1970); SEC v. Interlink Data Network of Los Angeles, Inc., No. Civ.
A93-3073, 1993 WL 603274 at *9, (C.D. Cal. Nov. 15, 1993), rev’d on other
grounds, 77 F.3d 1201 (9th Cir. 1996). In light of the high degree of scienter
associated with the charged fraudulent activities and the enormous losses to
investors that flowed from them (which Plaintiff will show at the requested
hearing), substantial civil penalties are appropriate in this case for each violation
committed by Defendants.

G.
ADDITIONAL INFORMATION AND REQUEST FOR A HEARING

Plaintiff requests that the Court order a hearing on this Motion for Default
Judgment, so that it may present evidence concerning the amount of civil penalties
appropriate for the Court to order.


Specifically, Plaintiff plans to present the testimony of victims who
purchased shares of Conversion at tremendously inflated prices after relying on the
fraudulent misrepresentations made by Defendants charged in the Complaint.
These victims will explain the substantial losses that they suffered, and the effects
of those losses on their daily lives. In addition, Plaintiff plans to present the
testimony of a staff accountant of the Commission, to quantify for the Court the
approximate total losses to investors flowing from Defendants’ fraudulent
misrepresentations. Finally, Plaintiff will present evidence of Defendant Harris’s
plan to enrich himself and his family members through stock sales during his
fraudulent manipulation of Conversion’s stock price.


CONCLUSION
 
Posted by a surfer on :
 
that sums it up nicely...

Thanks Wally.


I like this line here....

Moreover, it is
clear from Harris’s comments in open court and from his pleadings that he still does
not recognize, or at least does not acknowledge, the wrongful nature of his conduct.
Still in his thirties and with no apparent means of support but for future fraudulent
activity, Harris poses a significant danger of additional violations.
 
Posted by Mr. CATIAEngineer on :
 
I am sooo thankful that this will get to see its day in court....Federal court. I think it will be very interesting, kinda wish it wasnt such a distance for me to catch it live myself.

May someone please show us the evidence?

-------------

edit
Hmmm....is the SEC trying to skip the trial? How can they request such a thing?
 
Posted by thesource on :
 
Well that about sums it up . Notice the blame is on RPH's head . It might be true that there was other crap leading up to this but the fact is Rufus mislead and flat out lied to investors and as a result led to the significant price increase of the stock . Once the default is granted , there will be a criminal case brought before a Federal Grand Jury with this being the nail in the coffin for this dip $hit .

Now they need to go after Sabra before she screws more people with her new company .
 
Posted by Ocqueoc on :
 
Wally to my rescue once again!!!

Thank you , you kind sir!
 
Posted by TimW on :
 
Just got a cert in the mail today for my CSHD and other stock shares i had in my closed account.

Interesting, CSHD is the only one where the CEO or authorized officers signature is not on it. Instead, its a digital copy of john arlitt's.

Oh well, ill build it into a nice glass coffee table.. remind me every day of my mistake.
 
Posted by thesource on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by Mr. CATIAEngineer:
I am sooo thankful that this will get to see its day in court....Federal court. I think it will be very interesting, kinda wish it wasnt such a distance for me to catch it live myself.

May someone please show us the evidence?

-------------

edit
Hmmm....is the SEC trying to skip the trial? How can they request such a thing?

Its over ..... all thats left is for the Judge and the SEC to decide what actions will be taken civily against CSHD . The next step foward is to go after those responsible for this criminally .

As for evidence , for some reason I guess you guys think this is an episode of Perry Mason but its not . This is a federal civil suit . It requires the defendant "CSHD' to respond to it in a timely manner prescribed by law which they did not . There for the Default Judgement is in place and its game over for CSHD . Evidence does not even play much of a role in this if the defendant cannot not even file a timely responce in court to begin with .
 
Posted by new2stocks on :
 
[Eek!]

http://www.digitalislandsinc.com/misc/index.html
 
Posted by T e x on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by new2stocks:
[Eek!]

http://www.digitalislandsinc.com/misc/index.html

noice, lol...

was gonna post that my own self...

hope everybody remembers the "tie-in"
 
Posted by thesource on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by new2stocks:
[Eek!]

http://www.digitalislandsinc.com/misc/index.html

Now that was some good reading .
 
Posted by TimW on :
 
I laughed.. until it kicked in, that crap, im one of those people too.

Then my heart dropped in sorrow.

I really wish there was solid evidence between paul poetter, 4309, and CSHD..

Because 4309's tiny little cubicle office is walking distance from my house.. Id gladly go see if they got my money!! [Mad]
 
Posted by TimW on :
 
So who runs this board? I just noticed contact information i posted for paul poetter awhile back has been edited out in my posts. I had those posts bookmarked and now stuff is missing.

Could allstocks possibly have been in on the scam? [Eek!]
 
Posted by Stockstar69 on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by TimW:
So who runs this board? I just noticed contact information i posted for paul poetter awhile back has been edited out in my posts. I had those posts bookmarked and now stuff is missing.

Could allstocks possibly have been in on the scam? [Eek!]

THE PLOT THICKENS...stay tuned!
[Roll Eyes]
 
Posted by PCola77 on :
 
Am I totally onfused or are you? It already had it's day in court, Rufus didn't bother to answer, so the day in court is over and CSHD and Rufus lost.

Why do you expect theer to be more to it?

quote:
Originally posted by Mr. CATIAEngineer:
I am sooo thankful that this will get to see its day in court....Federal court. I think it will be very interesting, kinda wish it wasnt such a distance for me to catch it live myself.

May someone please show us the evidence?

-------------

edit
Hmmm....is the SEC trying to skip the trial? How can they request such a thing?


 
Posted by TimW on :
 
From what was posted, yep, looks like courts pretty much done for.
 
Posted by Mr. CATIAEngineer on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by PCola77:
Am I totally onfused or are you? It already had it's day in court, Rufus didn't bother to answer, so the day in court is over and CSHD and Rufus lost.

Why do you expect theer to be more to it?

quote:
Originally posted by Mr. CATIAEngineer:
I am sooo thankful that this will get to see its day in court....Federal court. I think it will be very interesting, kinda wish it wasnt such a distance for me to catch it live myself.

May someone please show us the evidence?

-------------

edit
Hmmm....is the SEC trying to skip the trial? How can they request such a thing?


Well, in any case they have to show their evidence in future filings on the case correct? Im not saying that i understand the next legal process but after reading the results of other SEC investigations they do explain what the fines are and where the money will come from....if there is any.

"Over" or not we are still entitled to an explanation of some sort IMO.
 
Posted by T e x on :
 
We'll see more, in the ruling...but given the default, not much evidence--if any--will be required.
 
Posted by glassman on :
 
i still want to see the evidence.
 
Posted by T e x on :
 
Who doesn't?

In a case rife with "theories" and "whodunits?"--perhaps one more: was the default part of "the plan"? One could certainly make a logical argument...
 
Posted by a surfer on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by glassman:
i still want to see the evidence.

I want to see some jail time for several.

Rufus, Mike, Sabra, Tut, Paul, Mikes wife and who ever else was in on the gig.

Personally I think Sabra and Mike A. are the most dangerous and should prosecuted immediately before they hurt more families with their lies.

There HAS TO BE punishment or the parade will continue as it is today with Sabra....pathetic bi tch.
 
Posted by glassman on :
 
don't hold your breath...

i've been following the AIG/Berkshire Hathaway case for a couple years..
they are bigger fish, but white collar crime in america just isn't a high priority unless you are running for Governor of NY or something like that [Roll Eyes]

look how bad Koslowski and Ken Lay had to screw up before they got indicted...

Kolsowski's wife is divorcing him while he's in prisonm, and he spent 2 million (company expense account) on a birthday party for her in Italy LOL..
 
Posted by T e x on :
 
ya...and if die at the right time, they wipe off the conviction.

SUX!
 
Posted by Ocqueoc on :
 
Happy Thanksgiving Everyone!!!!!
 
Posted by Ocqueoc on :
 
Did anyone else hear that?

It was a pin dropping!
 
Posted by notever on :
 
Is there supposed to be something showing up on Pacer this week? TIA if anyone knows.
 
Posted by T e x on :
 
who *could* know outside of the judge's secretary/staff, etc... Federal judges pretty much move on their own timetable.
 
Posted by stocktrader22 on :
 
Wonder if i can sell this POS for tax losses now.
 
Posted by Mr. CATIAEngineer on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by stocktrader22:
Wonder if i can sell this POS for tax losses now.

I'll be holding my shares until someone someplace puts all of this together for us. I think the SEC will do the right thing in the end.......i STILL wouldnt be surprised if Mr Harris assists them in doing so.

Time will tell
 
Posted by T e x on :
 
you think he'll have a change of heart? He hasn't "assisted," yet.

*********

st22: you might check with your broker re: declaring them worthless; prolly depend on the size of your (remaining) position.
 
Posted by thesource on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by Mr. CATIAEngineer:
quote:
Originally posted by stocktrader22:
Wonder if i can sell this POS for tax losses now.

I'll be holding my shares until someone someplace puts all of this together for us. I think the SEC will do the right thing in the end.......i STILL wouldnt be surprised if Mr Harris assists them in doing so.

Time will tell

You might as well hold on to them . Unless you have a few million shares , they aren't worth selling unless you need the tax right off .
 
Posted by Mr. CATIAEngineer on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by T e x:
you think he'll have a change of heart? He hasn't "assisted," yet.

*********

st22: you might check with your broker re: declaring them worthless; prolly depend on the size of your (remaining) position.

Change of heart? No, i think he had hoped that they could do it without his help a year ago. Someone just posted this at the other board, its a pretty good excerpt.

--------------------

from the court documents dated Oct 25, 2006 9:00AM

"Page 5 line 17-23 Ms Black speaking
and more significantly, the volume of the stock has also been inflated. and the reason why that matters, Your Honor, is that sometimes people inflate the value of the stock because they're selling it. That's the dump part of the pump and dump. And we need to find out whether they've been selling it with our expected discovery in the next ten days before the Commission's freeze is over."

------------------

From what ive seen SO FAR im not so sure they pulled the trading records and proved what they aimed to prove in that 10 day period. Maybe they did and they are just waiting for that "right time" to provide the court with that info. Im betting they did NOT pull the trading records and if this is the case they are certainly not protecting me as a shareholder.

Again...time will tell
 
Posted by T e x on :
 
whoa...slow down, hoss...

from where are we getting transcripts of court dialogue?
 
Posted by Mr. CATIAEngineer on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by T e x:
whoa...slow down, hoss...

from where are we getting transcripts of court dialogue?

Im working on getting the answer of that question for you. The dialogue is very familiar to me but with all of the filings, PRs, interviews, etc..its friggin impossible to find stuff like this sometimes. I have basically every document that found itself into emails and websites but some are on my work PC, some are here at home...and admittedly some were lost in a PC crash.

If it turns out I cant find the docs to support what was written feel free to delete my post and I will retract my opinion in the matter.

Yours truly,
Hoss

[Razz]
 
Posted by T e x on :
 
lol, your post will stand, as far as I'm concerned...

Ben
 
Posted by Mr. CATIAEngineer on :
 
For those who care........

For legal reasons that I may or may not understand i decided to PM Tex regarding the court transcripts. Being a MOD I will kindly leave it up to Tex what he does with it. [Smile]

Question though Tex....what did you mean by "Ben"?
 
Posted by T e x on :
 
Ben Cartwright, Ponderosa, Little Joe, Adam


Hoss [Wink]
 
Posted by T e x on :
 
btw, will review when i can give it more full attention...

not something to take lightly
 
Posted by thesource on :
 
So whats up with this stink hole lately ?
 
Posted by RyanPBF on :
 
I heard rufus's mail is being returned undeliverable. That was posted on ihub
 
Posted by Mr. CATIAEngineer on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by thesource:
So whats up with this stink hole lately ?

It had actually dropped off page one but thanks to you we are back on top! Nice work!

So now that you are here, do you have something useful to add?

[Roll Eyes]
 
Posted by Mr. CATIAEngineer on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by RyanPBF:
I heard rufus's mail is being returned undeliverable. That was posted on ihub

Yup, and there was a follow up post that goes like this......

--------------------

"I just checked Pacer regarding the undeliverable mail. The Court attempted to send him a copy of The Order Granting Motion to Strike his Answer and denying his Motion to Set Aside the Default, which was signed on October 30, 2007. The way I interpret the notations on Pacer, the mail was resent to him (I assume at the new P.O. Box on his Motions) on November 27th."

---------------------

We all know he moved (was evicted..whatever) so this was no surprise to me.
 
Posted by Mr. CATIAEngineer on :
 
OT : An interesting read on some changes being discussed in the Canadian Market (B.C. specifically).

------------------

"He said many professional facilitators -- accountants, lawyers and geologists -- "shut their eyes" to the problem. He warned that the commission would report professionals who knowingly aid and abet sham deals to their professional organizations.

Eady said many OTC companies don't have "real shareholders," rather they have "fake shareholders" who in some cases don't even know they have been listed as shareholders. They are simply stooges for the promoters.

To stop this sort of stock-rigging, the commission is proposing rules to make it illegal for seed shareholders in B.C. to sell back their stock to the promoters. Instead, they will have to sell their shares through a broker, from an account in their own name, into the market. This will move all this share dealing from the back room into the public domain, where people can see what's going on."

http://tinyurl.com/3956n7
 
Posted by thesource on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by Mr. CATIAEngineer:
quote:
Originally posted by thesource:
So whats up with this stink hole lately ?

It had actually dropped off page one but thanks to you we are back on top! Nice work!

So now that you are here, do you have something useful to add?

[Roll Eyes]

Nope just wondering if the company is still GOLDEN or not .
 
Posted by Mr. CATIAEngineer on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by thesource:
quote:
Originally posted by Mr. CATIAEngineer:
quote:
Originally posted by thesource:
So whats up with this stink hole lately ?

It had actually dropped off page one but thanks to you we are back on top! Nice work!

So now that you are here, do you have something useful to add?

[Roll Eyes]

Nope just wondering if the company is still GOLDEN or not .
Wasnt the "Golden" stuff from our infamous friend Tut-Arlitt? We dont really talk like that anymore.

In any case, IMO we should see some new / updated court docs any time now.

Get yourself a Pacer account and follow closely. If its information you are craving that would be the place to watch....IMO.
 
Posted by NEL on :
 
wow down 96% to .0001
 
Posted by Mr. CATIAEngineer on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by NEL:
wow down 96% to .0001

Yupper....on a 35000 share trade.

$3.50?

thesource....did you finally dump your shares? [Smile]
 
Posted by glassman on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by thesource:
quote:
Originally posted by Mr. CATIAEngineer:
quote:
Originally posted by thesource:
So whats up with this stink hole lately ?

It had actually dropped off page one but thanks to you we are back on top! Nice work!

So now that you are here, do you have something useful to add?

[Roll Eyes]

Nope just wondering if the company is still GOLDEN or not .
short goldman sachs [Big Grin] oh, wait this is the CSHD thread... [Eek!]
 
Posted by thesource on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by Mr. CATIAEngineer:
quote:
Originally posted by NEL:
wow down 96% to .0001

Yupper....on a 35000 share trade.

$3.50?

thesource....did you finally dump your shares? [Smile]

hell I dumped them month ago at .12 a share ......
 
Posted by Mr. CATIAEngineer on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by thesource:
quote:
Originally posted by Mr. CATIAEngineer:
quote:
Originally posted by NEL:
wow down 96% to .0001

Yupper....on a 35000 share trade.

$3.50?

thesource....did you finally dump your shares? [Smile]

hell I dumped them month ago at .12 a share ......
Theres always that tax write off I suppose
 
Posted by Stockstar69 on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by glassman:
quote:
Originally posted by thesource:
quote:
Originally posted by Mr. CATIAEngineer:
quote:
Originally posted by thesource:
So whats up with this stink hole lately ?

It had actually dropped off page one but thanks to you we are back on top! Nice work!

So now that you are here, do you have something useful to add?

[Roll Eyes]

Nope just wondering if the company is still GOLDEN or not .
short goldman sachs [Big Grin] oh, wait this is the CSHD thread... [Eek!]
Funny, I thought CSHD was going to takeover Goldman Sachs? If nothing else, I'm still following this for my daily dose of humor. And yes, I'm still holding shares until I need to offset my ETIM or DPDW gains.

Godspeed! [Big Grin]
 
Posted by PCola77 on :
 
You have to be at a huge loss on ETIM, what gain are you referring to?
 
Posted by thesource on :
 
I have a buy order for 1 million shares at .0002 so lets see if it hits just for $hits and giggles .
 
Posted by Mr. CATIAEngineer on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by thesource:
I have a buy order for 1 million shares at .0002 so lets see if it hits just for $hits and giggles .

Youre hooked!! [Razz]
 
Posted by thesource on :
 
You got it ....... TO DA MOON BABY !!!

Dufus Harris for prez 2008 ....
 
Posted by TimW on :
 
Oh cmon, it hasnt been .12 in MONTHS. Like back in march/feb.

Theres like what, 30 million shares? Even at .0002 double todays price thats only a grtand total of $6,000.

Who wants to go halvsies on CSHD with me?


....jk
 
Posted by RyanPBF on :
 
up 3000% that's pretty funny
 
Posted by Stockstar69 on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by Mr. CATIAEngineer:
quote:
Originally posted by thesource:
I have a buy order for 1 million shares at .0002 so lets see if it hits just for $hits and giggles .

Youre hooked!! [Razz]
Hey look, someone fat fingered a buy order for 1 million shares at 2.00! LOL just kidding, but wouldn't that cause a frenzy. Don't laugh, didn't that happen with a Japanese trader earlier this year. [Eek!]
 
Posted by Mr. CATIAEngineer on :
 
FWIW the James Gee deposition found its way onto the net. H S M posters were nice enough to zip it up and post it for all to read. To be perfectly honest....95% of the things depo will go against the Texas crew IMO.

Anyone know the legality of that? Arent depos meant to be private until the court case? I realize that the bulk of it was just the SEC attorney taking Gee's documents (CDs and Flash drive) and placing them as exhibts but a lot of questions were answered as well along the way.

IMO if this goes to jury trial anything written in this document would be useless.....correct?

Anyway, I think we might start hearing more about Robert "Darby" Boland. Apparently he is a large shareholder in the company and also the word is that he was a very vocal member of the SHC. It is also rumored he was "friends" with John Arlitt. A few months BEFORE the CVSU merger was announced, Furia had written a LOI to buy a small fleet of freight aircraft from Utilicraft.....Darbys company. Now Randy Moseley works for Utilicraft, interesting.

----------------------------

Early 2006 Fronthaul has a LOI with Utilicraft.......

http://sec.edgar-online.com/2006/03/17/0001104659-06-017495/Section19.asp

About Randy Moseley........

"In 2005 and 2006, Mr. Moseley was an Executive Vice President and the Chief Financial Officer for The Furia Organization, Inc. (OTC BB: FURA)."

I have a question......in this link you will find....

"Mr. Moseley has no family relationships with any other officer or director of the Company, and has never had any direct or indirect material interest in any transaction effected by the Company. "

http://yahoo.brand.edgar-online.com/EFX_dll/EDGARpro.dll?FetchFilingHTML1?Sessio nID=GiuiClomAh-LWvd&ID=5070385

Would this be an incorrect statement based on the info above?

--------------------------------

This takes me back.....and starts to ring some bells. Check out of my post on this page...April 2nd, 2007. [Smile]

http://www.allstocks.com/stockmessageboard/ubb/ultimatebb.php/ubb/get_topic/f/2/ t/013717/p/32.html
 
Posted by LT on :
 
Rut Roh , Alana Black has some ezzzplainin to do .... [Big Grin] ..how did that depo get out?...lol

http://rapidshare.com/files/74836105/JamesGee.zip

scroll down and click free.
 
Posted by LT on :
 
"Let the DA disgruntled shareholders testify when this is done their testimony will hang the SEC and friends, to include the TA!!!! " ...Rufus Paul Harris

[Eek!] ..... [Big Grin]
 
Posted by thesource on :
 
Mr. Cat , its not going to a jury trial . The case is over and the SEC won because Dufus didn't respond in time or with an attorney . How hard is that for some of you to comprehend ? The next steps are going to be the enforcement of any judgements gramted to the SEC and possibly a criminal case or cases against those who are responsible .
 
Posted by Mr. CATIAEngineer on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by thesource:
Mr. Cat , its not going to a jury trial . The case is over and the SEC won because Dufus didn't respond in time or with an attorney . How hard is that for some of you to comprehend ? The next steps are going to be the enforcement of any judgements gramted to the SEC and possibly a criminal case or cases against those who are responsible .

So explain to me the purpose of the deposition then.....
 
Posted by thesource on :
 
Its just like any other case , evidence is collected to build a case . In this situation , the SEC didn't need any proof or evidence because CSHD and Dufus failed to respond in the time prescribed by law to begin with . Its an open and shut case . The SEC has won by default . End of story really ......
 
Posted by LT on :
 
the SEC hasnt won anything ..lol.. there will be a hearing some time in the near future.
 
Posted by notever on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by LT:
the SEC hasnt won anything ..lol.. there will be a hearing some time in the near future.

Any idea what the hearing is about? TIA
 
Posted by thesource on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by LT:
the SEC hasnt won anything ..lol.. there will be a hearing some time in the near future.

Oh boy here we go again .......
Why don't you give a little more details about this hearing so I can laugh in your face when it doesn't happen .
 
Posted by notever on :
 
Is it a "Show Cause Hearing"?
 
Posted by Mr. CATIAEngineer on :
 
The rumor is.....there were a few other depositions. Rumor created by Dogman aka James Gee

Ben Stanley
Sabra Dabbs
Don Maddalon
Dave Perley
Romeo Venditti
Ismet Paez
Mike Alexander.
 
Posted by thesource on :
 
I have no doubt the SEC interviewed several of the people associated with the company . I think this is the #1 reason that they are convinced this was a scam and the bonds do not belong to CSHD or Dufus either in whole or partialy .

You guys are over complicating things . The SEC filed suit against the company . The CEO shows up along with his group of croneys and the judge humors them but informs them they need an attorney . Dufus , knowing the company is broke decides to ignore the judges orders and starts this conspiracy theory of the government is out to get him and his family to divert attention to the real matters of hand . During this song and dance show , the limit to respond to the suit runs out and the SEC filed a motion for a default judgement and list the companies failure to respond in a timely manner as the reason it should be granted . The judge agrees and its game over . After months and months of this crap , Dufus still continues with this line of conspiracy theories and a case of who done it .

Dufus needs to keep his focus on his DUI case and keeping his ignorant hill billy azz out of prison although I personally hope he gets stuffed by some big black guy named Tyrone in the Georgia State Pen.
 
Posted by Mr. CATIAEngineer on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by thesource:
I have no doubt the SEC interviewed several of the people associated with the company . I think this is the #1 reason that they are convinced this was a scam and the bonds do not belong to CSHD or Dufus either in whole or partialy .

You guys are over complicating things . The SEC filed suit against the company . The CEO shows up along with his group of croneys and the judge humors them but informs them they need an attorney . Dufus , knowing the company is broke decides to ignore the judges orders and starts this conspiracy theory of the government is out to get him and his family to divert attention to the real matters of hand . During this song and dance show , the limit to respond to the suit runs out and the SEC filed a motion for a default judgement and list the companies failure to respond in a timely manner as the reason it should be granted . The judge agrees and its game over . After months and months of this crap , Dufus still continues with this line of conspiracy theories and a case of who done it .

Dufus needs to keep his focus on his DUI case and keeping his ignorant hill billy azz out of prison although I personally hope he gets stuffed by some big black guy named Tyrone in the Georgia State Pen.

Hmmm, some interesting opinions there. If youre right....ill gladly tell you so later. If youre wrong, ill laugh in your face for selling at .12 (mostly because of your rude comment to LT) [Wink]
 
Posted by thesource on :
 
Yeah I seriously doubt thats going to happen but if so ...... feel free to laugh as loud as you'd like at my expense .
 
Posted by Mr. CATIAEngineer on :
 
Milliam......

In the depo from James Gee he claims that Rufus copied the files from his computer and gave the drive to Michael Alexander. Does that seem slightly different from the original story?
 
Posted by T e x on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by thesource:
I have no doubt the SEC interviewed several of the people associated with the company . I think this is the #1 reason that they are convinced this was a scam and the bonds do not belong to CSHD or Dufus either in whole or partialy .

You guys are over complicating things . The SEC filed suit against the company . The CEO shows up along with his group of croneys and the judge humors them but informs them they need an attorney . Dufus , knowing the company is broke decides to ignore the judges orders and starts this conspiracy theory of the government is out to get him and his family to divert attention to the real matters of hand . During this song and dance show , the limit to respond to the suit runs out and the SEC filed a motion for a default judgement and list the companies failure to respond in a timely manner as the reason it should be granted . The judge agrees and its game over . After months and months of this crap , Dufus still continues with this line of conspiracy theories and a case of who done it .

Dufus needs to keep his focus on his DUI case and keeping his ignorant hill billy azz out of prison although I personally hope he gets stuffed by some big black guy named Tyrone in the Georgia State Pen.

prolly worse than that...

designed to implode is a logical assumption
 
Posted by LT on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by thesource:
Yeah I seriously doubt thats going to happen but if so ...... feel free to laugh as loud as you'd like at my expense .

dont worry we will..... [Big Grin]

EXIT plan in full effect..... [Cool]
 
Posted by T e x on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by LT:
quote:
Originally posted by thesource:
Yeah I seriously doubt thats going to happen but if so ...... feel free to laugh as loud as you'd like at my expense .

dont worry we will..... [Big Grin]

EXIT plan in full effect..... [Cool]

really?

rave on... would love to hear about the plan.
 
Posted by wallymac on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by LT:
the SEC hasnt won anything ..lol.. there will be a hearing some time in the near future.

Yes, there will be a hearing. Just not the one that you are thinking. THe case is over. Here is what the hearing will be about. Straight from the PACER documents posted earlier on this thread.


G.
ADDITIONAL INFORMATION AND REQUEST FOR A HEARING

Plaintiff requests that the Court order a hearing on this Motion for Default
Judgment, so that it may present evidence concerning the amount of civil penalties
appropriate for the Court to order.


Specifically, Plaintiff plans to present the testimony of victims who
purchased shares of Conversion at tremendously inflated prices after relying on the
fraudulent misrepresentations made by Defendants charged in the Complaint.
These victims will explain the substantial losses that they suffered, and the effects
of those losses on their daily lives. In addition, Plaintiff plans to present the
testimony of a staff accountant of the Commission, to quantify for the Court the
approximate total losses to investors flowing from Defendants’ fraudulent
misrepresentations. Finally, Plaintiff will present evidence of Defendant Harris’s
plan to enrich himself and his family members through stock sales during his
fraudulent manipulation of Conversion’s stock price.

 
Posted by a surfer on :
 
wonder if this is Lady Trader (LT) from HSM...

Is it you LT???
 
Posted by thesource on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by LT:
quote:
Originally posted by thesource:
Yeah I seriously doubt thats going to happen but if so ...... feel free to laugh as loud as you'd like at my expense .

dont worry we will..... [Big Grin]

EXIT plan in full effect..... [Cool]

Yeah , I hear ya . I still can't believe after over a year of this crap there are still people buying this .
 
Posted by LT on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by thesource:
quote:
Originally posted by LT:
quote:
Originally posted by thesource:
Yeah I seriously doubt thats going to happen but if so ...... feel free to laugh as loud as you'd like at my expense .

dont worry we will..... [Big Grin]

EXIT plan in full effect..... [Cool]

Yeah , I hear ya . I still can't believe after over a year of this crap there are still people buying this .
even better question is , why is it trading at ALL?.... no 15c211 was ever filed..so the grey share are ALL illegal in the market... oops more egg in the SEC's face to deal with .....
 
Posted by LT on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by wallymac:
quote:
Originally posted by LT:
the SEC hasnt won anything ..lol.. there will be a hearing some time in the near future.

Yes, there will be a hearing. Just not the one that you are thinking. THe case is over. Here is what the hearing will be about. Straight from the PACER documents posted earlier on this thread.


G.
ADDITIONAL INFORMATION AND REQUEST FOR A HEARING

Plaintiff requests that the Court order a hearing on this Motion for Default
Judgment, so that it may present evidence concerning the amount of civil penalties
appropriate for the Court to order.


Specifically, Plaintiff plans to present the testimony of victims who
purchased shares of Conversion at tremendously inflated prices after relying on the
fraudulent misrepresentations made by Defendants charged in the Complaint.
These victims will explain the substantial losses that they suffered, and the effects
of those losses on their daily lives. In addition, Plaintiff plans to present the
testimony of a staff accountant of the Commission, to quantify for the Court the
approximate total losses to investors flowing from Defendants’ fraudulent
misrepresentations. Finally, Plaintiff will present evidence of Defendant Harris’s
plan to enrich himself and his family members through stock sales during his
fraudulent manipulation of Conversion’s stock price.

I'll let RPH answer this.... [Wink]

"Let the DA disgruntled shareholders testify when this is done their testimony will hang the SEC and friends, to include the TA!!!! "
 
Posted by LT on :
 
So The Huminitarian bond is what we say questionable due to Sakli involvment. During the October hearing, Rufus presented exhibits to counter each accusation being brought forth by the SEC. At one point, they went into a quick recess. During this time, Rufus mentioned to Alana that he had concerns over the legality of the Humanitarian bond. When they came back from recess, Alana immediately told the judge that Rufus had just told her that he knew this bond was fake (not really what he told her). He SET HER UP AND SHE FELL FOR IT! Blabbed about it to the Judge, this specific bond and not any others, and now it's in the court records! Alana and the SEC will have a hard time expalining this!

this is what RPH said about it.....

I will get to the bottom of it with the US authorities or with the IMF and others soon!!!

Adnan Sakli (FD# 8216 and 8217) the Numbers appear on his this Top Secret GOV credentials!!

Yes he is the signatory of the B/Trillions in Bonds held in the Banking system to include Euroclear!!! And Yes I can produce several international bankers who will testify when the time is right about what Sakli and the others involved do when funds are arranged off of the Bonds!!! I can even provide in many cases the screen printouts of the transactions and codes!!!

Sakli and Greenspan boys are the big players in this game!!!

After they stole Billions of foreign dollars from transactions with bonds like the ones in CSHD, I started a plan to expose them in the public and drop the case in the SEC hands the regulatory agency of all Securities!!!!!


The SEC have to prove who dumped which means they will have to show that CSHD was naked shorted because that is a fact. They are not doing that.

The SEC have to look into the bonds. If they do, they will discover that RPH is actually exposing someone elses fraud and that would be Sakli and Greenspan boys. They can't do that either.
RPH has dropped both issues in the lap of the SEC and they aren't doing anything about it. They are trying to divert the truth.
This will all come out in court one day. I am counting on it.
 
Posted by T e x on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by LT:
quote:
Originally posted by thesource:
quote:
Originally posted by LT:
quote:
Originally posted by thesource:
Yeah I seriously doubt thats going to happen but if so ...... feel free to laugh as loud as you'd like at my expense .

dont worry we will..... [Big Grin]

EXIT plan in full effect..... [Cool]

Yeah , I hear ya . I still can't believe after over a year of this crap there are still people buying this .
even better question is , why is it trading at ALL?.... no 15c211 was ever filed..so the grey share are ALL illegal in the market... oops more egg in the SEC's face to deal with .....
abject silliness... issues trade on greys precisely because no MM will touch a 15c2-11 filing... doesn't make the shares illegal, though.

Where did you hear such an idea?
 
Posted by LT on :
 
Remember this !!!...we are awaiting a EXIT..it has NOTHING to do with the fed. court case... [Wink]
however the EXIT will provide Evidence for the court case...

"It will be the collection and exchange that exposes the fraud "

i hope by now everyone has their hard Copy Certificates.
 
Posted by LT on :
 
Tex its not just the greys its all the shares after the merger... did you read the merger Agreement ?
 
Posted by LT on :
 
Appellate Division: Second Judicial Department

M15453

CF/

2004-05310

Mortgage Electronic Registration Systems,

Inc., plaintiff-respondent, v Adnan Sakli,

et al., defendants-respondents, Long Island

Realty Development, Ltd., appellant.

(Index No. 418/03)
---------------------------------------------------

something from 2004

http://siliconinvestor.*********/readmsg.aspx?msgid=22756742

.
 
Posted by LT on :
 
PPT is the Plunge Protection Team, and here is a latest artilce on them. An interesting concept set up many years ago.

http://www.marketoracle.co.uk/Article1771.html

.
 
Posted by LT on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by a surfer:
wonder if this is Lady Trader (LT) from HSM...

Is it you LT???

it is.... [Big Grin]
 
Posted by T e x on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by LT:
Tex its not just the greys its all the shares after the merger... did you read the merger Agreement ?

I take it you're referring to the proposed merger--the one that never was completed...

What's that got to do with the fantastic claims that led to the suspension?
 
Posted by stocktrader22 on :
 
I can care less about this POS, I sold all out the other day. Moved on to bigger and better things a long time ago.
 
Posted by thesource on :
 
LT its really a shame that you along with a lot of others continue to dwell on the words of a complete idiot . Just think of all the money you could have made if you'd direct that time towards something else . Hell I made back all my losses and then some on a single stock called ECFL which is now MNTY . I turned $200.00 into $12,000 in 5 weeks .

As I said before , you loonies can laugh all you want at me when you are all filthy rich but I'd bet you just remain filthy for a very , very long time .
 
Posted by Mr. CATIAEngineer on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by thesource:
LT its really a shame that you along with a lot of others continue to dwell on the words of a complete idiot . Just think of all the money you could have made if you'd direct that time towards something else . Hell I made back all my losses and then some on a single stock called ECFL which is now MNTY . I turned $200.00 into $12,000 in 5 weeks .

As I said before , you loonies can laugh all you want at me when you are all filthy rich but I'd bet you just remain filthy for a very , very long time .

ECFL? Looks a lot like a "Pump and Dump"...based on the post below it almost looks like you agree. Were you informed of the pump or did you just get lucky? [Wink]

-------------------------

thesource
Member


Member Rated:
posted March 12, 2007 20:30
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
I'll be buying some discounted shares this week just incase there is another BS merger around the corner . Those die hard ECFL fans can't get enough of them .

--------------------
Go Spurs Go !!!

------------------------------------
http://www.allstocks.com/stockmessageboard/cgi-bin/ultimatebb.cgi?ubb=get_topic; f=8;t=026461;p=7
 
Posted by PCola77 on :
 
yeah, source, I usually agree with you, but that seems like just a bit of a stretch to say you made a 60bagger without ever taking any profits on a company that you knew was a scam. Especially given how much people here preach "I learned form CSHD to take profits, no matter how sure a thing it looks".

Sorry, but I don't buy it. Not even slightly.
 
Posted by PCola77 on :
 
Can you explain why you think this? I mean, this is like if the Steelers didn't show up to play the Patriots today, and then for 2 years kept claiming that the Patriots never beat tham and they still have to play the game. No they don't. If you forfeit, you LOSE, end of story. There is no more to the story.

quote:
Originally posted by LT:
the SEC hasnt won anything ..lol.. there will be a hearing some time in the near future.


 
Posted by thesource on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by PCola77:
yeah, source, I usually agree with you, but that seems like just a bit of a stretch to say you made a 60bagger without ever taking any profits on a company that you knew was a scam. Especially given how much people here preach "I learned form CSHD to take profits, no matter how sure a thing it looks".

Sorry, but I don't buy it. Not even slightly.

I personally do not care what you believe . Infact the 60 bagger was on the last good runs only . I actually made more than that earlier this year on the first couple of runs . Here's my history from the last few months .......


11/02/07 Sold 2,000,000 of ECFL * $0.00 (Order #99) 6,986.90
11/01/07 Bought 2,000,000 of ECFL * $0.00 (Order #95) -3,612.99
10/30/07 Sold 1,555,428 of ECFL * $0.01 (Order #90) 8,541.72
10/19/07 Bought 1,555,428 of ECFL * $0.00 (Order #85) -1,101.79
10/15/07 Sold 714,285 of ECFL * $0.00 (Order #77) 986.99
10/05/07 Bought 714,285 of ECFL * $0.00 (Order #66) -512.99
10/01/07 Sold 412,500 of ECFL * $0.00 (Order #55) 440.75

This is from the last 90 days . I couldn't go back any further on my E trade account .
 
Posted by thesource on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by Mr. CATIAEngineer:
quote:
Originally posted by thesource:
LT its really a shame that you along with a lot of others continue to dwell on the words of a complete idiot . Just think of all the money you could have made if you'd direct that time towards something else . Hell I made back all my losses and then some on a single stock called ECFL which is now MNTY . I turned $200.00 into $12,000 in 5 weeks .

As I said before , you loonies can laugh all you want at me when you are all filthy rich but I'd bet you just remain filthy for a very , very long time .

ECFL? Looks a lot like a "Pump and Dump"...based on the post below it almost looks like you agree. Were you informed of the pump or did you just get lucky? [Wink]

I got very lucky plus I've learned not to fall in love with this crappy azz penny stocks . Its hard sometimes to take a profit and watch it continue to run up and its equally hard to hold it when you watch it start to turn and run the other way . With ECFL , I've played it long enough to get a decent feel for the stock . I knew that it was just a matter of time before another merger would come down the pipe line and when it did , the sucker fish would hit on it like it were a piece of cake . Now that the merger deal has finally went through (or so they claim) , the stock will probably just fizzle out and most will forget about it again for a while . I am probably done with it myself and looking for something else . I have a lot of shares in CBAY , GMSC , PDVP & EFGO . All are POS's and I will probably get burned on a R/S on atleast one if not all of them but thats the way it goes . I also picked up some ETIM the other day and some WLM along with FDO and CHCG (which I sold off for $700.00 profit a few days later).

Sometimes its better to be lucky than good .....
 
Posted by milliam on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by Mr. CATIAEngineer:
Milliam......

In the depo from James Gee he claims that Rufus copied the files from his computer and gave the drive to Michael Alexander. Does that seem slightly different from the original story?

I'm still reading the depo, but from what I remember, MA was up there pulling data off the computer. When I was up there, RPH was not nore was James Gee. MA borrowed another drive from one of the shareholders (that he knew well), but I'm not sure if he had to use that or not.
 
Posted by Mr. CATIAEngineer on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by milliam:
quote:
Originally posted by Mr. CATIAEngineer:
Milliam......

In the depo from James Gee he claims that Rufus copied the files from his computer and gave the drive to Michael Alexander. Does that seem slightly different from the original story?

I'm still reading the depo, but from what I remember, MA was up there pulling data off the computer. When I was up there, RPH was not nore was James Gee. MA borrowed another drive from one of the shareholders (that he knew well), but I'm not sure if he had to use that or not.
Thats how I thought the story went. The depo appears to bend that story a bit IMO.
 
Posted by LT on :
 
From Rufus Paul Harris to ALL Shareholders...


"Things that will be needed from shareholders shortly!!!

1.) Statements or Affidavits about conversations with broker dealers about a bid or ask when buying shares on the Grey's
2.) Statement or Affidavits and support about anyone who has posted shares for sale on the Grey's at high prices and the market has traded around your sale price
3.) Any records (emails, PM or post) with MA, JA, DP and JG and Sabra Dabbs
4.) Statements or Affidavits about conversations with the Shareholder committee
5.) Any records (emails, PM or post) with JG or anyone on the Shareholder committee
6.) Statements or Affidavits about any conversations with the Transfer Agent
7.) Any records (emails, PM or Post) with the Transfer Agent
8.) Statements or Affidavits about any conversation with Alana Black or an attorney for the SEC
9.) Any records (emails, PM or electronic Com) with Alana Black or an attorney with the SEC

Any shareholder that has some of the above documentation or that is willing to give a statement or affidavit about an item please send your name and Item to me with the #1-9 in the subject line via pm and Email to Harris*gabreeders.com

More things are to follow such as
Any watch and document documentation!!! Like Market activity and anything that you may have saved from HSM, IHUB or PM’s with anyone who is now a know basher

This is the time to dig up those old files DDers

Our time of reconciliation has finally come!!!

GODSPEED and GODBLESS shareholders

I will return in a few to start the compiling process, but I want to also place everything on this board for all to see

Will a MOD start a PR thread and post all PRs that they can find in order (Please keep the thread locked from posting, a view only)

Will a MOD also start a SEC filing thread and post all SEC filings in order (Please keep the thread locked from posting, a view only)



Hey Bashers and HSM, IHUB bholes"
[Big Grin] [Big Grin] [Big Grin]

cvsu. pro boards 100 .com
 
Posted by glassman on :
 
Its hard sometimes to take a profit and watch it continue to run up and its equally hard to hold it when you watch it start to turn and run the other way

stone cold discipline wins every time.
 
Posted by thesource on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by glassman:
Its hard sometimes to take a profit and watch it continue to run up and its equally hard to hold it when you watch it start to turn and run the other way

stone cold discipline wins every time.

These are things you learn in time as you get burned in the market . Most noobies and even seasoned traders have a hard time not buying into the hype .
 
Posted by Stockstar69 on :
 
Down she goooooes! Ouch!
 
Posted by TimW on :
 
I hate to say it but if this was a scam shouldnt Rufus be in jail by now?

If this was an open and shut case I dont see why this stock is still trading and Rufus still is running free.

As much as it hurts to say it, I think theres a chance for CSHD to do *something* the longer this goes on... Its been over a year already.
 
Posted by T e x on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by TimW:
I hate to say it but if this was a scam shouldnt Rufus be in jail by now?

If this was an open and shut case I dont see why this stock is still trading and Rufus still is running free.

As much as it hurts to say it, I think theres a chance for CSHD to do *something* the longer this goes on... Its been over a year already.

Tim,

not trying to be "mean," but your post almost shouts, "I don't know anything about this stuff."
 
Posted by PCola77 on :
 
That's been the mantra over some people for like a year now "If he really did somethign wrong he'd be in jail by now and the company would be shut down! We're golden!"

And wasn't it trading at over $1 still when it began on the greys? Wonder if any of those people ever thought it would be .0001 this soon.
 
Posted by T e x on :
 
Nothing to do with trading, exactly, but I've noticed that a human tendency is to "hang on." that is, it's very hard to "let go."

Like the monkey who gets trapped grasping for the goodies...

To wax philosophic, I suspect it's inherent, given the development of the opposable thumb...a genetic survival mechanism if you're swinging through trees and hating the idea of feeding crocs, lurking below...

The adaptable, however, figure out that trading is different from swinging from branch to vine.
 
Posted by glassman on :
 
stubbornness is an admirable quality.

it's not just swinging thru trees...

how about tracking down that heard of reindeer that's always just out of reach?

if people would actually stick to some of these scams instead of disappearing into the wood work out of shame or exhaustion or whatever? the scammers would begin to realise that we will eventually catch up with them and make a meal...

IMO? the people that attempt to shame others into shutting up are just facilitating the crooks.

keeping this alive and front and center is a very unsubtle warning to all newbies who show up... they can hardly miss it.
 
Posted by glassman on :
 
why do medical billing co's keep sending out bills that you don't even owe three and four and five times? cuz nobody follows up.

those bills cost at least a couple bucks to generate and mail.. must profit in it somewhere....
 
Posted by TimW on :
 
I've read alot on previous stock scams and there has been awhole lot more legal action than whats going on here.

Theres actually prosecution that occurs in the other cases.. Here they just write cute little love letters back and fourth.. what gives? [Confused]

I know the process can take awhile but as mentioned, you dont show the case is usually closed. This is still open after apparently several no shows on rufus's part.

I dont get it.
 
Posted by thesource on :
 
Rufus is not in jail because he has not been directly linked to any ill gotten gains yet and he might not ever be . Maybe he's truely that stupid to put his neck on the line and not benefit from it . Maybe he was played all along but if thats the case , he should have not run his mouth like he did and make promises he could not keep .

All of the bogus mergers and toxic financing doesn't mean a damn thing to me . Its not what lured me into the stock . The talk of multi billion dollar bonds and huge contracts are what lured me in and was also the drving force behind the huge increase in the price of shares . Rufus is responsible for that because he was in charge of the company at that time .
 
Posted by T e x on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by TimW:
I've read alot on previous stock scams and there has been awhole lot more legal action than whats going on here.

Theres actually prosecution that occurs in the other cases.. Here they just write cute little love letters back and fourth.. what gives? [Confused]

I know the process can take awhile but as mentioned, you dont show the case is usually closed. This is still open after apparently several no shows on rufus's part.

I dont get it.

Actually, this is fairly typical. To get the kind of "instant karma" that some clamor for would require poking Congress with a sharp stick...can you whittle?
 
Posted by Mr. CATIAEngineer on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by thesource:
Rufus is not in jail because he has not been directly linked to any ill gotten gains yet and he might not ever be . Maybe he's truely that stupid to put his neck on the line and not benefit from it . Maybe he was played all along but if thats the case , he should have not run his mouth like he did and make promises he could not keep .

All of the bogus mergers and toxic financing doesn't mean a damn thing to me . Its not what lured me into the stock . The talk of multi billion dollar bonds and huge contracts are what lured me in and was also the drving force behind the huge increase in the price of shares . Rufus is responsible for that because he was in charge of the company at that time .

On at least one interview Rufus said this was going to be a rough ride and wanted people who were aware of that to remain shareholders through it all. He admitted there were crooks "involved" in some way but that they (he and Ben) would stick around to see it through.

IMO you likely didnt listen to the interviews and now feel like you took some sort of bait and was "lured" into the stock. The warnings were there...some chose to bail, some didnt. Its unfortunate that some took a big loss instead of just sitting on the shares....IMO the more shares on hard certs the better. Im pretty confident that there are MILLIONS more CSHD shares in the market than were authorized by the company...tens of millions, maybe more. Now that you have sold...those shares will probably be swept under the rug.
 
Posted by T e x on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by glassman:
why do medical billing co's keep sending out bills that you don't even owe three and four and five times? cuz nobody follows up.

those bills cost at least a couple bucks to generate and mail.. must profit in it somewhere....

why do insurance companies routinely deny first billings? If the medical office manager doesn't resubmit with certain "code words" on the resubmittal, the insurance company never pays...
 
Posted by T e x on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by Mr. CATIAEngineer:
quote:
Originally posted by thesource:
Rufus is not in jail because he has not been directly linked to any ill gotten gains yet and he might not ever be . Maybe he's truely that stupid to put his neck on the line and not benefit from it . Maybe he was played all along but if thats the case , he should have not run his mouth like he did and make promises he could not keep .

All of the bogus mergers and toxic financing doesn't mean a damn thing to me . Its not what lured me into the stock . The talk of multi billion dollar bonds and huge contracts are what lured me in and was also the drving force behind the huge increase in the price of shares . Rufus is responsible for that because he was in charge of the company at that time .

On at least one interview Rufus said this was going to be a rough ride and wanted people who were aware of that to remain shareholders through it all. He admitted there were crooks "involved" in some way but that they (he and Ben) would stick around to see it through.

IMO you likely didnt listen to the interviews and now feel like you took some sort of bait and was "lured" into the stock. The warnings were there...some chose to bail, some didnt. Its unfortunate that some took a big loss instead of just sitting on the shares....IMO the more shares on hard certs the better. Im pretty confident that there are MILLIONS more CSHD shares in the market than were authorized by the company...tens of millions, maybe more. Now that you have sold...those shares will probably be swept under the rug.

ya, the "bait" was the $15 "reset" based on "bonds" [Roll Eyes]
 
Posted by glassman on :
 
i still say that (technically) all you need to do a "reset" is to have one MM ready to do it, and value to back it up...

when somebody posts SEC filings saying they have them? that should be enough proof, esp. if they are left up there for months.
 
Posted by thesource on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by Mr. CATIAEngineer:
quote:
Originally posted by thesource:
Rufus is not in jail because he has not been directly linked to any ill gotten gains yet and he might not ever be . Maybe he's truely that stupid to put his neck on the line and not benefit from it . Maybe he was played all along but if thats the case , he should have not run his mouth like he did and make promises he could not keep .

All of the bogus mergers and toxic financing doesn't mean a damn thing to me . Its not what lured me into the stock . The talk of multi billion dollar bonds and huge contracts are what lured me in and was also the drving force behind the huge increase in the price of shares . Rufus is responsible for that because he was in charge of the company at that time .

On at least one interview Rufus said this was going to be a rough ride and wanted people who were aware of that to remain shareholders through it all. He admitted there were crooks "involved" in some way but that they (he and Ben) would stick around to see it through.

IMO you likely didnt listen to the interviews and now feel like you took some sort of bait and was "lured" into the stock. The warnings were there...some chose to bail, some didnt. Its unfortunate that some took a big loss instead of just sitting on the shares....IMO the more shares on hard certs the better. Im pretty confident that there are MILLIONS more CSHD shares in the market than were authorized by the company...tens of millions, maybe more. Now that you have sold...those shares will probably be swept under the rug.

You know what , I hope you are right for the sake of all the loyal people that continue to linger on every word that moron says .

For me the decision was made to sell and I stand by it 100% . In my opinion , there is nothing to be had . No bonds , no assets , no single person to go after to recoup the losses , hell not even a CEO any more since the SEC requested the Dufus be permantely suspended from ever being a board memeber on a publically traded company .

You have to ask yourself , has a single thing come to light that Dufus promised ? Other than it would go to court and all the info would be on record (or lack of in this case) . They were bluffing all along and got caught . I can only hope that atleast a few of them go to jail or at the very least are banned from being associated with publically traded companies for the good of future investors .
 
Posted by T e x on :
 
They could certainly get some dough from Alexander...

Glassy-eyed, there *is* a reset provision, but it doesn't apply here...as I recall, there used to be three types, A, B, and C...but they got expanded, through even a "G"-type. Even then, I couldn't make a case for it.

Now, I don't even remember where I posted that stuff...may be on the ref thread.
 
Posted by thesource on :
 
They might be able to recover some money from Alexander but did he directly profit from the pump and dump or from the bogus filings that Rufus filed with the SEC ? I am sure he profitted from the rise in the PPS but can it be proven that he did so in a manner that makes its a criminal offense ?
 
Posted by T e x on :
 
I have no idea what "can be proven."

I would imagine Corey's loan not being called in is at least somewhat damning...
 
Posted by Stockstar69 on :
 
Interesting...

http://www.dallasnews.com/sharedcontent/dws/bus/stories/121307dnbusinvestorweb.2 af4397.html

Not sure if it is or isn't related as it has been SO LONG AGO but still.
 
Posted by Igor R on :
 
*** was based in Dallas? I didn't know that, wasn't a certain MA and the rest of the texas crew based in dallas? Things that make you go hmmmm....lol
 
Posted by LT on :
 
Friday, December 14, 2007
« at 1:16am » Rufus Paul Harris wrote:

COMES NOW the Defendant, RUFUS PAUL HARRIS, a/k/a

PAUL RUFUS HARRIS, and moves this Court to compel discovery/

disclosure and allow this defendant all allowable discovery

prior to a hearing on the pending motions, also to further

expand the time allowed for the Defendant to file pleadings

and affidavits to supplement his Motion For Reconsideration

until such time as the Plaintiffs produce all discovery

contemplated under Rules 26, 27, 30, 34, 36 and 45 of

the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, and Local Federal Rules

26, 26.1, 26.3, 30, 37, 37.1, and further moves this Court to

impose sanctions against the Plaintiff and its individual

Attorneys, including, but not limited to a dismissal of

Plaintiff’s Complaint and in support thereof states the

following under oath:

--------------------------------------------

The rest will should show up no later than Monday on Pacer!!!


Here comes the good stuff people!!!
 
Posted by LT on :
 
There has been alot of funny stuff and all of it has been addressed in a big way this time around!!!

It is now offensive filings!!!

Food for thought, How can a clerk enter a Default when I answered the allegations on the first day of court and even presented a lot of evidence called exhibits all accepted by the court!!!!

Things that make you go Hmmmmmmmm!!!!

« Today at 2:07am by Rufus Paul Harris »
 
Posted by LT on :
 
According to court transcripts, this is the evidence submitted to court Oct 25 ,2006 by Mr. Harris:

- Global funding agreement with Carracas group $500M with an annex to extend that value to $5B.
- Euroclear security codes to show transfer of above bonds into CSHD account.
- All the CSHD account codes for Euroclear and Bloombergs required to access the $500M bonds.
- declaration from Banco Centra de Venezuela affirming validity of bond.
- certificate of ownership stamped and signed by Banco de Venezuela.
- letter from ambassador to UNESCO, stating that Bernard Kuepper has been hired to hand bond transactions into CSHD accounts via Dexia bank.

I find it interesting that NOT ONE of the parties mentioned above have come forward and made a public statement, or for that matter provided ANY info too SEC, too the effect that they have nothing to do with CSHD and RPH. Perhaps its all true! I believe it is. If it were not, this would have died a long time ago
----------------------------------------------

Friday, December 14, 2007
« Today at 2:23am »

How did those get there in the courts documents as exhibits if not presented with a answer???

Got to love the game!!! Man I am ready for this!!!

I would like to thank everyone for hanging in there, this has been a bumpy road but we will all see it through to the end!!!

GODSPEED and GODBLESS

Prayers are out to everyone that is having financial problems and May Gods will be done in your lives!!!
 
Posted by thesource on :
 
Yawn .......

And yet this idiot still doesn't have an attorney .
 
Posted by glassman on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by thesource:
Yawn .......

And yet this idiot still doesn't have an attorney .

that does suk, however, justice is supposed to blind. unfortunately? it's been pretty much blinded for along time [Big Grin]
 
Posted by glassman on :
 
here's a good page to read up on the bond market and how it works:


http://www.benbest.com/business/debt.html
 
Posted by thesource on :
 
Justice is suppose to be blind but the laws are the laws . He's trying to reprsent himself Pro Se but still trying to get the whole case dismissed which includes the company and that requires a corp. lawyer to be involved .

It really doesn't matter how many filings this bozo files at this point , the company is in default and the only thing going foward at this point will be how to disolve the company and any assets attached to it . After that , maybe we will get lucky and a few will go to jail over it but I am not holding my breathe on that one .
 
Posted by glassman on :
 
me either source, if we don't learn from our mistakes , we're doomed to repeat them...

here's the issue tho. Rufufu's incompetence is hurting third parties, and the law is flexible...

supose YOU were a judge, you're sitting there on the bech and you know this guy is an idiot, but he's got the goods?

how the heck they end with in th ehands of an incompetent like this is bizzare... but that's another story and may involve money laundering...

what do you as a judge do?

i'm posing hypotheticals here, not asserting that he's got 'em or anything else..

i would expect the guy to have crawled into a deep hole and covered himself up with dirt by now...
 
Posted by TimW on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by thesource:
For me the decision was made to sell and I stand by it 100% . In my opinion , there is nothing to be had . No bonds , no assets , no single person to go after to recoup the losses , hell not even a CEO any more since the SEC requested the Dufus be permantely suspended from ever being a board memeber on a publically traded company .
[/QB]

John Arlitt is still CEO and still at large.
 
Posted by BULListic on :
 
Who here is going (or has recently) to sell before the end of the year and take the tax loss (hopefully to offset all those other big gains [Wink] ?

Does anyone think this will ever trade again and worth keeping because it's not worth selling other than to take the loss this year? I'll get about enough to pay the commission.

In Rufus We Trust (well, that's how we felt 9 months ago), now he's just another scumbag slimeball crook.
 
Posted by glassman on :
 
here is what makes pennies such easy targets for scamsters..

keep in mind the current legal situation is still civil(as far as we know):

Do you have a legal question? Ask a lawyer now (free service).

intervention n. the procedure under which a third party may join an on-going law-suit, providing the facts and the law issues apply to the intervenor as much as to one of the existing contestants. The determination to allow intervention is made by a judge after a petition to intervene and a hearing on the issue. Intervention must take place fairly early in the lawsuit, shortly after a complaint and answer have been filed, and not just before trial since that could prejudice one or both parties who have prepared for trial on the basis of the original litigants. Intervention is not to be confused with joinder which involves requiring all parties who have similar claims to join in the same lawsuit to prevent needless repetitious trials based on the same facts and legal questions, called multiplicity of actions. (See: intervene, joinder)


in the big leagues? this would have been done in a timely fashion by the shareholders...

in the pennies? nobody cares or (normally) has enough at stake to move ahead as an intervenor....
 
Posted by thesource on :
 
If you need the tax write off , take it . Other wise you might as well leave it in your account .

As far as it trading again . Its trading right now . Its on the grey market thanks to old Rufus not complying with the SEC so they halted it . So MM's will sign on to it to it remains where it is .
 
Posted by LT on :
 
Watch Pacer my friend, Watch Pacer!!! Things be getting interesting!!
 
Posted by PCola77 on :
 
We're all waiting with baited breath... [Roll Eyes]
 
Posted by LT on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by PCola77:
We're all waiting with baited breath... [Roll Eyes]

lol.... [Big Grin]
 
Posted by thesource on :
 
So LT whats up with your homeboy's DUI case ? Did he get arrested for being a no show at court ?

To da moon .... thats your exit strategy .
 
Posted by TimW on :
 
Hey LT... I just rechecked my certs... still aint worth the ink used to print em.

Still watching and waiting as everyone else for the last 400 days.
 
Posted by thesource on :
 
Thats Rufus testing the true longs before its blast off time and the stock is trading at $100.00 per share . Remember they said to short Google and long CSHD . Maybe they are dyslexic ....... nah probably just full of crap .
 
Posted by TimW on :
 
This case should be "Alana black vs Rufus".

For someone who used to be so nice about CSHD she sure is attacking him and denying any knowledge of anything.

Wow this is really going to be interesting when its moved to US Attorney Generals office.
 
Posted by thesource on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by TimW:
This case should be "Alana black vs Rufus".

For someone who used to be so nice about CSHD she sure is attacking him and denying any knowledge of anything.

Wow this is really going to be interesting when its moved to US Attorney Generals office.

Its not really Alana vs. Rufus . Its the SEC vs. CSHD . The SEC is playing by the rulesof civil procdeure (whether you like the rules or you don't) and Rufus is the one trying to bend the rules in order to proceed with out hiring legal counsel for the company .

As far as a complaint being filed with the U.S.A.G's office , thats basically all they can do . It up to the AG to decide if the case has merits to be brought to court or not . Its kind of like a child support case . A woman cannot bring up a case through the states A.G's office without certain proof of the fatherhood of the child . The U.S.A.G's office is not going to step on the toes of a Federal Judge or the SEC unless they know for a 100% certainty something was in clear violation of the law and even then they might not unless a certain amount of punitive damage was caused by the action . I personally think this is just a ploy by Dufus to rally what little bit of troops he has left into thinking "they have the tiger by the tail." Pardon the expression but it seems to fit in this case .
 
Posted by LT on :
 
thesourse..... i have to ask , do you hold shares in CSHD ?
 
Posted by Mr. CATIAEngineer on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by LT:
thesourse..... i have to ask , do you hold shares in CSHD ?

He claims to have held shares and sold at...what was it, 0.12 for a big loss? Maybe it was 0.22. Annnnyway, he alledges to be a disgruntled ex-shareholder although sometimes he tends to direct his anger at the wrong people IMO.

Anyone following the dialogue between Rufus and James Gee? Im assuming its plastered all over H S M, I havent checked lately ive been down with the flu. Mr Harris seems to believe that Gee lied under oath, maybe a few different times. So far Gee's deposition has only hurt the Texas ring IMO. Still all very interesting.
 
Posted by thesource on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by LT:
thesourse..... i have to ask , do you hold shares in CSHD ?

I did ......

CSHD
CONVERSION SOLUTIONS HLDGS CORP COM 350.000 09/28/06 02/12/07 $40.94 $714.28 -$673.34 ST

CSHD
CONVERSION SOLUTIONS HLDGS CORP COM 200.000 09/28/06 02/12/07 $23.39 $774.16 -$750.77 ST

CSHD
CONVERSION SOLUTIONS HLDGS CORP COM 250.000 09/28/06 02/12/07 $29.24 $820.19 -$790.95 ST

CSHD
CONVERSION SOLUTIONS HLDGS CORP COM 500.000 09/28/06 02/12/07 $58.48 $1,010.40 -$951.92 ST

CSHD
CONVERSION SOLUTIONS HLDGS CORP COM 150.000 09/28/06 02/12/07 $17.54 $293.71 -$276.17 ST

CSHD
CONVERSION SOLUTIONS HLDGS CORP COM 200.000 09/29/06 02/12/07 $23.39 $747.62 -$724.23 ST

CSHD
CONVERSION SOLUTIONS HLDGS CORP COM 250.000 09/29/06 02/12/07 $29.24 $904.52 -$875.28 ST

CSHD
CONVERSION SOLUTIONS HLDGS CORP COM 100.000 10/04/06 02/12/07 $11.70 $270.81 -$259.11 ST

CSHD
CONVERSION SOLUTIONS HLDGS CORP COM 300.000 10/05/06 02/12/07 $35.09 $633.43 -$598.34 ST

CSHD
CONVERSION SOLUTIONS HLDGS CORP COM 1,000.000 10/06/06 02/12/07 $116.97 $1,915.00 -$1,798.03 ST

Now that I have gotten a good dose of reality , I play penny stocks like they should be played and let others hold the bag for me . Its been a lot more profitable that way . There is no shortage of brain washed people in stinky pinky land .
 
Posted by glassman on :
 
don't get too cocky... that's the next phase... once you have the "the game" figured out they change the rules again....
wait till you sell out at 50% profit and see them go to 2000% five times in a row [Big Grin] that's when the real discipline test begins...
 
Posted by thesource on :
 
Hey 50% is better than nothing but I know what you mean ...... I've done well on a few plays and jumped off the boat way too early on others but I am still learning only now I am making money in the process instead of giving it to others .
 
Posted by TimW on :
 
How long before Alana Black is prosecuted.. Anyone got a guess?

She was involved & defending CSHD well before this turd went to court.
 
Posted by TimW on :
 
source, at least you sold when they were worth more than a penny! LoL. Last i checked i could sell mine for $40... total.
 
Posted by TimW on :
 
Request for Hearing, submitted to District Judge Clarence Cooper. (vs) (Entered: 12/04/2007)


"Most recently, in February 1990, Judge Cooper was appointed by Governor Joe Frank Harris to fill a vacancy on the Georgia Court of Appeals and a few months later, ran a successful campaign and was elected statewide to retain that seat for a six-year term beginning January 1991."


I found this kinda funny... No idea yet if joe frank harris, previous governor, is related to Rufus.. But they do sign very similar!!

http://www.devilstomper.org/jfharris.htm

Even signed it in the same "god bless" fashion.


TexasMoney had some correlation between the two previously.


But now i guess its going into court where the Judge previously got his position thanks to a Harris.
 
Posted by TimW on :
 
Maybe one good deed from a harris to a cooper is returned again, from a cooper to a harris?
 
Posted by Igor R on :
 
I believe rufus has said before he has no relation to joe frank harris.
 
Posted by T e x on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by TimW:
How long before Alana Black is prosecuted.. Anyone got a guess?

She was involved & defending CSHD well before this turd went to court.

"defending CSHD"

What are you talking about?
 
Posted by LT on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by Mr. CATIAEngineer:
quote:
Originally posted by LT:
thesourse..... i have to ask , do you hold shares in CSHD ?

He claims to have held shares and sold at...what was it, 0.12 for a big loss? Maybe it was 0.22. Annnnyway, he alledges to be a disgruntled ex-shareholder although sometimes he tends to direct his anger at the wrong people IMO.

Anyone following the dialogue between Rufus and James Gee? Im assuming its plastered all over H S M, I havent checked lately ive been down with the flu. Mr Harris seems to believe that Gee lied under oath, maybe a few different times. So far Gee's deposition has only hurt the Texas ring IMO. Still all very interesting.

LOL... you can see the disgruntled ex-shareholder's a mile away , but i had to ask.....

james Gee ....you talkin about this?.. [Big Grin]


James Gee: Rufus if you wanted me under oath then maybe you should have shown up to my deposition. Mrs Black said you were informed in advance for my deposition but decided not to show. You could have seen my trade records that were laid in front of me by Mrs Black to see that I sold approximately $56,000 in stock and the days I sold. Mrs Black said that each time she performed a deposition you were required to be notified and allowed to attend but never once showed up. I did however take your advice and "Watch and Document". I know the SEC was impressed. You are a master of trying to divert attention from yourself and blame others. I have a few questions for you and a couple of challenges if you arent too scare or having "Net Problems" LOL

Rufus: First of all Gee Baby, the reason I did not show up is that I wanted you to lie as you did and incriminate your self!! Never interrupt an enemy while they are making a mistake!!! First rule of War!!! You see if I was there I would have laugh at all of the wrong times and may have influenced your answers!! You will be sitting in another one with myself asking the questions soon enough, and we will see if you answer in the same manner.

James Gee: As with any deposition, you would have had your turn to question if you showed after the SEC was finished. I wouldnt expect you to know that since you have never attended one deposition.


Rufus: I would and will enjoy explaining strategy to a simple minded crook like yourself, Your deposition provided tools and directly resulted in your friends MA and DP’s follow up depositions and investigation. Let me help you understand “The Hang Mans Rope” way of dealing with a lying crook such as you, My line of questing would have directly resulted in corrections of your false comments. I would rather deal with them in court and watch you change them in from of a Grand Jury!!!

You Sir are a Liar and your deposition proves it!!! You will at the correct time be dealt with, this I promise. I would also like to thank you for the perjury that you committed in your deposition, you played as expected!!



James Gee: 1. Give me written permission to place all of the records from the company along with your email on a public forum. If you are telling the truth then this should not be a problem. If you dont then most will know you are FOS.

Rufus: So done, I will give you that luxury if you give me a copy of your Hard Drive as I did you!!! Can you Man up to that one Gee Baby!!! Yeah right like you will, But rest assured I will have them even if I have to get them through an federal subpoena like before.

James Gee: You can have my hard drive and my trading records. Access to my accounts, or anything else you want. You can have all email and PM conversations. If you would have shown up to the deposition the SEC would have provided a copy of all of the above as they had it when I got there.


Rufus: This statement will become ironic after the next pacer filing!!


James Gee: 2. Why did you never draw down on a bond that was in the company's name for approximately 9 months.

Rufus: See Filings with the SEC for the answer to that one!!!

James Gee: Way to avoid the question as is your MO. You never drew down on the bonds because you have no clue as to how that is accomplished. You had these bonds since the beginning of 2006 and told the bond owners you could close in 72 hrs. You were off by eternity. Romeo even had a $200 million line of credit out of Panama signed and delivered to you. All you had to do was act on it. The swift fee initially for the Ven Bond was free. You delayed so long that the bond owners wanted 200k plus shares. You even had JV contracts that you never funded.

Rufus: Liars, Crooks and Manipulators all use this strategy, your statement as the one before will become ironic as this proceeds!!!

But I will have a little fun to show you ignorance, “Romeo even had a $200 million line of credit out of Panama signed and delivered to you.” You small minded dummy, this statement directly contradicts 90% of everything you say about me. I thought that I was a Fraud and had nothing, Remember by your previous statements I am a fraudulent short seller!!! But now the Bond owners wanted 200k plus shares, A little help for you (CSHD is the Bond owners after execution of the Global Funding Agreement) the old owner can not change the agreement or the terms therein!!!

Close in 72 hours, Hmmmmmm, where is that stated in the Global Funding Agreement!!


James Gee: 3. Why did you use company funds for your horses.

Rufus: Equine Solutions was a JV with CVSU prior to Butthaul, but anyone other than an idiot would have known that one!!!

james Gee: Way to twist. How about I ask in a different way. I understand that Equine Solutions was a JV. How did the horses magically migrate ownership from Equine Solutions to GA Breeders with no money changing hands between the two. When you fund a JV there should be some type of pay schedule for use of funds. There never were. Also CSHD should not have paid for food for the horses owned by Equine. CSHD should have given money to Equine and Equine should have paid for horses, feed, vets, etc. Want to talk about fishy or an idiot. Dont throw stones if you live in a glass house.


Rufus: Not important to answer but I will entertain you BS for shareholder sake!! This is like chatting with a 5th grader!!! I personally bought every horse with my own funds!!! When I closed the doors on CSHD that resulted in cshd defaulting the JV with myself and the ownership reverted back to me, Hey someone had to feed and take care of the Horses!!!

James Gee: 4. Why did you not show for your hearing.

Rufus: This one is way over my head!!! Have not a clue as to what you are speaking of!!!

James Gee: DUI ring a bell.

Rufus: Watch and Learn.

James Gee: 5. I understand that you and MA were working together to short the stock. Guess the truth will come

Rufus: Words of an true Idiot!!!

James Gee: An idiot would be one who just doesnt have the capability to understand information. Stupid like yourself would be someone who has the information but chooses not to use it. I am sorry that the wonderful shareholders from Wattle that you GAVE shares to, didnt cut you in on their sales like they promised. Or the people you used to short your own stock ran off with your money like DW did. That is why the SEC is proving a plan and not illgotten gains because they ran off with your criminal money. Remember in Dallas when you told everyone about having "FRIENDS" overseas who were buying up the stock. LOL Berlin Exchange will allow the use of stock even if it is restricted. Who do we know that had millions in restriced shares and were bound on how much they could sell per quarter. HMMMMMMMMM

Rufus: You and your girlfriend Sabra are so stupid!!!! Roll over and tell her I said that!!!

Ok lets break down your fraudulent statements!! Your use of “FRIENDS” overseas buying up stock and statement about the Berlin Exchange allowing the use of restricted stock contradicts itself!!

Your comment about DW is correct he sold restricted stock and he did so by using the same Attorney opinion letter from OK that you and the other illegal FHAL obtained shareholders did!!!

The rest of your comments are just more of the BS that you love to spread!!


James Gee: If you could do any one of the following not only will I be surprised but impressed.

Rufus: I will play this game with you for a few post, I will be posting a few questions for you!!!

James Gee: I can do this all day. You arent messing with any of these shareholders who isnt in the know. I am the "know". I know exactly what you did and how you did it from day one. It was a great plan but when you deal with crooks like yourself nothing good ever comes out of it. My only wish for Christmas would be for you to quit tormenting innocent shareholders with your BS because that is all it is. You never delivered on one thing you have said. You couldnt get 15 pps so what did you do, Dilute our stock, or at least that is what you PLANNED. IMO you are full of hot air and love the sound of your voice. Your time is coming. The SEC will deal with your criminal activity soon enough and then maybe someone will clean up this shell a few years from now and maybe we can get our investment back.

Rufus: Gee Baby, You are a liar and part of the crooks, this will be proved soon enough, your continued relationship with Sabra and your other crooked stock ventures are just adding to the proof!!

Do not think that no one knows about your activities, several shareholders off of the HSM board have forwarded your written activities and are willing to give affidavit to such!!!

Each of you will go down, sorry to hear about your Marriage and your last company problems in TX!!! Another thing No one is going to help Sabra or fund your deals the word is out on you guys!!

I really like the rollover you did on MA and DP, it helped!!!
[Big Grin] [Big Grin] [Big Grin]
 
Posted by LT on :
 
Today at 2:41am » Rufus Paul Harris wrote:

"When we get the trading records and the transactions from the TA this is going to get interesting!!!!"

"Has anyone been following Sabras, Tony Soprano and James Gee new company???"
[Big Grin]
 
Posted by thesource on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by TimW:
How long before Alana Black is prosecuted.. Anyone got a guess?


Are you freaking kidding ? I really hope you not thinking that some how Alana Black's head will be on any chopping block .....

Thats totally absurd .
 
Posted by LT on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by thesource:
quote:
Originally posted by TimW:
How long before Alana Black is prosecuted.. Anyone got a guess?


Are you freaking kidding ? I really hope you not thinking that some how Alana Black's head will be on any chopping block .....

Thats totally absurd .

by the time this is over you will see how true his statement really is.... [Wink]
why do you think the other 2 SEC attorney's left her high and dry....lol..Alana's days are numbered my friend... [Big Grin]
 
Posted by thesource on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by LT:
Today at 2:41am » Rufus Paul Harris wrote:

"When we get the trading records and the transactions from the TA this is going to get interesting!!!!"

"Has anyone been following Sabras, Tony Soprano and James Gee new company???"
[Big Grin]

Since you seem to have a direct line with God himself , why not ask him why in the Fu<K is he waiting a year to finally get off his aZZ and do something about this and why in the he!! hasn't he hired an attorney ?

One last thing , all the above questions and their answers have no impact on this case . Its game over folks , plain and simple . I've said it for months and I'll say it again .
 
Posted by LT on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by thesource:
quote:
Originally posted by LT:
Today at 2:41am » Rufus Paul Harris wrote:

"When we get the trading records and the transactions from the TA this is going to get interesting!!!!"

"Has anyone been following Sabras, Tony Soprano and James Gee new company???"
[Big Grin]

Since you seem to have a direct line with God himself , why not ask him why in the Fu<K is he waiting a year to finally get off his aZZ and do something about this and why in the he!! hasn't he hired an attorney ?

One last thing , all the above questions and their answers have no impact on this case . Its game over folks , plain and simple . I've said it for months and I'll say it again .

lol...its over for you cuz you sold out...its best for you to leave this thread all together , the pain wont be as bad....if you stay it may be to painfull to see the ending of this ...
 
Posted by thesource on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by LT:
quote:
Originally posted by thesource:
quote:
Originally posted by TimW:
How long before Alana Black is prosecuted.. Anyone got a guess?


Are you freaking kidding ? I really hope you not thinking that some how Alana Black's head will be on any chopping block .....

Thats totally absurd .

by the time this is over you will see how true his statement really is.... [Wink]
why do you think the other 2 SEC attorney's left her high and dry....lol..Alana's days are numbered my friend... [Big Grin]

I cannot confirm or deny that statement because its been months since I spoke to her but just taking a wild guess off the top of my head .....

Because its OVER ....... The SEC has a default judgement and there is nothing that CSHD or its band of merry losers is going to do to reverse it . Why tie up 3 prosecutors on a default case ? I am sure they have their hands full with other stock scams themself .
 
Posted by LT on :
 
Today at 3:00am Rufus Paul Harris wrote:

"the Exit has nothing to do with Court, but will be performed at the right time!!! I still have that last FatHead in the way, it is a little more trouble than expected, but getting closer!!!"
 
Posted by thesource on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by LT:
quote:
Originally posted by thesource:
quote:
Originally posted by LT:
Today at 2:41am » Rufus Paul Harris wrote:

"When we get the trading records and the transactions from the TA this is going to get interesting!!!!"

"Has anyone been following Sabras, Tony Soprano and James Gee new company???"
[Big Grin]

Since you seem to have a direct line with God himself , why not ask him why in the Fu<K is he waiting a year to finally get off his aZZ and do something about this and why in the he!! hasn't he hired an attorney ?

One last thing , all the above questions and their answers have no impact on this case . Its game over folks , plain and simple . I've said it for months and I'll say it again .

lol...its over for you cuz you sold out...its best for you to leave this thread all together , the pain wont be as bad....if you stay it may be to painfull to see the ending of this ...
Thats is stupid . If I wanted back in , do you seriously think I could not buy this POS for micro pennies on the dollar ?
 
Posted by thesource on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by LT:
Today at 3:00am Rufus Paul Harris wrote:

"the Exit has nothing to do with Court, but will be performed at the right time!!! I still have that last FatHead in the way, it is a little more trouble than expected, but getting closer!!!"

What happened to the 2 weeks ???? Oh yeah I guess we can add that to the list of bull$hit promises he's made along the way . You honestly cannot be that stupid that you cannot see things a lot clearer than they were last year at this time . Dufus can't doing anything at this point but sit back and watch . Maybe he can save some of his azz if he helps them go after other related to the case but I would sure like to see his hill billy azz do some time for all the people he's hurt along the way .
 
Posted by LT on :
 
Early next week we will see at least 2 of 5 Filings . [Wink]
-----------------------------------------------------------
Today at 3:06am, eyegeddeeven wrote: So... Are we expecting an update on PACER on Monday?
I've heard so much....
----------------------------------------------------------

Today at 3:11am Rufus Paul Harris wrote:

"Sure thing!!!! [Big Grin] Just 2 of 5 that is being filed!!! Stepping things up a little and giving the court a chance to make things right, before we step things up on the Hill!!!"


.
 
Posted by thesource on :
 
Well Lord Rufus said it , you know its going to happen right ???? He's always been a man of his word . LMMFAO !!!!!
 
Posted by LT on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by thesource:
quote:
Originally posted by LT:
quote:
Originally posted by thesource:
quote:
Originally posted by LT:
Today at 2:41am » Rufus Paul Harris wrote:

"When we get the trading records and the transactions from the TA this is going to get interesting!!!!"

"Has anyone been following Sabras, Tony Soprano and James Gee new company???"
[Big Grin]

Since you seem to have a direct line with God himself , why not ask him why in the Fu<K is he waiting a year to finally get off his aZZ and do something about this and why in the he!! hasn't he hired an attorney ?

One last thing , all the above questions and their answers have no impact on this case . Its game over folks , plain and simple . I've said it for months and I'll say it again .

lol...its over for you cuz you sold out...its best for you to leave this thread all together , the pain wont be as bad....if you stay it may be to painfull to see the ending of this ...
Thats is stupid . If I wanted back in , do you seriously think I could not buy this POS for micro pennies on the dollar ?
oh god plz dont ....i dont want you as a shareholder and RPH dont need ya either ...
you got into this for the quick $$ and your mad at the wrong people for not being able to do so....move on...
 
Posted by thesource on :
 
I got into this for the same reason all the rest of you suckers did so don't go playing that quick cash card with me .

You might as well hold yours because its only worth what its worth in your head . If it makes you feel better to hold out knowing some day you will be laughing in the faces of people like me , then knock yourself out . I personally think the price of the stock speaks louder about the company than any single one of you kool-aid drinking bozo's .
 
Posted by LT on :
 
have a great weekend source .. catch ya later.
 
Posted by thesource on :
 
I plan to ..... you do the same and be sure to have a glass of kool aid handy just in case you start feeling it wear off before Monday .
 
Posted by 10of13 on :
 
Haha...source? Why do you always seem to "bicker" with everyone?

Looks like RPH is still "trying"...what is so interesting is that if this is really "over" why does he keep on?

And it does seem that there should be some additional charges brought against him if there was indeed "wrong doing"...

But that can take a while...right?

BUT on the other hand...if it can "take a while" to bring additional charges" against HIM...

Then it could "take a while" for HIM to do what ever it is he is "planning" on doing...

ALWAYS 2 sides to every coin...even if it is a 2 headed coin! [Wink]
 
Posted by thesource on :
 
10of13 : I am just a bitter old azzhole ...... [Smile]

As for answering your questions , let me try one at a time .

Q:Looks like RPH is still "trying"...what is so interesting is that if this is really "over" why does he keep on?

A:Because he's an ignorant moron that thinks the law does not apply to him .

Q:And it does seem that there should be some additional charges brought against him if there was indeed "wrong doing"...

A:Absolutely but it might or might not happen . This is totally up to the people prosecuting the case and for the FBI to decide if criminal charges will be brought up . From there the charges are sent to a Federal Grand Jury to approve or kick back .

Q:But that can take a while...right?

A:You bet it can , sometimes it can takes years for people to be brought to justice if ever .

Q:BUT on the other hand...if it can "take a while" to bring additional charges" against HIM...

A:See answer to above question

Q:Then it could "take a while" for HIM to do what ever it is he is "planning" on doing...

A: In regards to the suit filed against CSHD by the SEC , its over and done . The company failed to respond in the time limit prescribed by law and still has no legal counsel .

In regards to filing something with the U.S.A.G's office , he can file anything he wants personally but when it involves issues pertaining to the company , the moron will still need to hire a corp. attorney to represent the company in any proceedings .

Q:ALWAYS 2 sides to every coin...even if it is a 2 headed coin!

A:Not if the coin has the same thing on both sides ........
 
Posted by Mr. CATIAEngineer on :
 
Well i see everyone here is playing nice. [Smile]

Thanks for bringing that Rufus / Gee stuff over LT. I started to dig for it but my Nyquil kicked in and off to lala land I went.

I see some people are still convinced that the default judgement has killed us.....I guess that remains to be seen.

TimW...you might have some confusion regarding Alana Black. She is the SEC attorney that is leading this from the SEC side. Will she get bad press from this case? Maybe [Smile]
 
Posted by thesource on :
 
Mr Cat , do this , go look up civil procedures and look up the term "DEFAULT JUDGEMENT" . If you get a regular judgement through the courts against you , that can be appealed in most cases to a higher court unless the judgement was given in the highest court available . In cases of a DEFAULT judgement , they are non appealable and cannot be heard by another judge for a chance to turn it over .

Once again , I say , its game over !!!
 
Posted by glassman on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by thesource:
Mr Cat , do this , go look up civil procedures and look up the term "DEFAULT JUDGEMENT" . If you get a regular judgement through the courts against you , that can be appealed in most cases to a higher court unless the judgement was given in the highest court available . In cases of a DEFAULT judgement , they are non appealable and cannot be heard by another judge for a chance to turn it over .

Once again , I say , its game over !!!

UH? that might be true when there's only two parties source, in this case there's a lot of interested parties. this ain't goin' bye bye any time soon...
 
Posted by glassman on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by thesource:
Hey 50% is better than nothing but I know what you mean ...... I've done well on a few plays and jumped off the boat way too early on others but I am still learning only now I am making money in the process instead of giving it to others .

keep jumpin' off the boat... 99% of em sink sooner or later...
 
Posted by a surfer on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by TimW:
How long before Alana Black is prosecuted.. Anyone got a guess?

She was involved & defending CSHD well before this turd went to court.

Tim I think you are mixing up Alana Black with Sabra Dabbs.

Oh and a card reader told my wife we were coming into a bunch of money in Feb.

I can't wait...... [Eek!] [Roll Eyes] LOL
 
Posted by thesource on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by glassman:
quote:
Originally posted by thesource:
Mr Cat , do this , go look up civil procedures and look up the term "DEFAULT JUDGEMENT" . If you get a regular judgement through the courts against you , that can be appealed in most cases to a higher court unless the judgement was given in the highest court available . In cases of a DEFAULT judgement , they are non appealable and cannot be heard by another judge for a chance to turn it over .

Once again , I say , its game over !!!

UH? that might be true when there's only two parties source, in this case there's a lot of interested parties. this ain't goin' bye bye any time soon...
I disagree . This is nothing more than another stinky pinky stock . No one from higher up the food chain gives a rats azz about it . Rufus is the one making it sound like some one does . Do you honestly think big money would have let this go down the way it has ? Do you not think they would have brought in a lawyer ? You know a Georgia bull dog ???

Its a scam and time has run out on it . All of us were caught in the cross hairs .
 
Posted by glassman on :
 
you've been saying that for months now...adnauseum...

fact is ? i don't expect to see this thing run or get value, but the story line will go on, and stinky attitudes just beget more stink
 
Posted by 10of13 on :
 
Source says... 10of13 : I am just a bitter old azzhole ......

Nah...BUT maybe you and RPH have more in common than you would like to admit... [Razz]

I am really just teasing...I do find humor in the fact that you always seem to be the one that is trying to get everyone to realize that it is "over"...it's almost as if you are trying to convince yourself...

Chances are "pretty good" that there may never be "anything" come of CSHD...BUT it isn't "over" until there are no more filings and no more discussions...

And yes..there ARE ALWAYS 2 sides to EVERY coin..regardless... [Cool]

Smile you bitter old AZZhole.... [Wink]
 
Posted by thesource on :
 
I was convinced the day they showed up for court without their attorney present and the judge told them not to come back without one . I should have sold off then but didn't thinking maybe , just maybe they would hire legal counsel .
 
Posted by glassman on :
 
gotta admit that was pretty boneheaded....

this "case" has it all doesn't it?
 
Posted by thesource on :
 
Its really stupid for someone thats suppose to have all this knowledge of running a company and about bonds worth BILLIONS of dollars . Who drew up the contracts for CSHD ???

I bet you don't really want to know the answer to that one [Wink]
 
Posted by glassman on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by thesource:
Its really stupid for someone thats suppose to have all this knowledge of running a company and about bonds worth BILLIONS of dollars . Who drew up the contracts for CSHD ???

I bet you don't really want to know the answer to that one [Wink]

what makes you say i don't want to know the answer?

at one time, i had read all the SEC filing for quite a way back... that was about 18 months ago now....
 
Posted by T e x on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by thesource:
Its really stupid for someone thats suppose to have all this knowledge of running a company and about bonds worth BILLIONS of dollars . Who drew up the contracts for CSHD ???

I bet you don't really want to know the answer to that one [Wink]

what contracts?
 
Posted by thesource on :
 
The contracts for the bonds . I personally believe that they were done in house by Rufus and the gang as a cut and paste job . If I had to guess . most of the actual cutting and pasting was done by Sabra Dobbs . She seems to know more than she led onto back last year now that she's got her own little scam going on .
 
Posted by T e x on :
 
lol...contracts for bonds?

really? and these have been published? posted?

Gawd, there's so much to remember...
 
Posted by thesource on :
 
Well I am referring to the paper work filed with Georgia court .
 
Posted by T e x on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by thesource:
Well I am referring to the paper work filed with Georgia court .

during the TRO hearing?

as I recall, that was just notarized "stuff," right?
 
Posted by thesource on :
 
Man they are airing out the dirty laundry over on HSM pretty good . Too bad it took a year to do so ....
 
Posted by T e x on :
 
ya, ya, ya...so what about these "contracts" ?
 
Posted by wallymac on :
 
At this point, I don't want to deal in any of the past BS. I don't care if the default can be reopened. What I want to know is: If the bonds were real and the JV's? Are they still owned by CSHD or since no payments have been made on either has CSHD defaulted on them? (keep in mind this is assuming that everything is/was on the up and up.)

According to my reading of the filings certain payments were due on the bonds. I have seen no evidence that those payments were made and therefore CSHD would be in default on those agreements just as they would be in default on the JV's since no payments were made on those either.

So, what assets would CSHD have? Legally, by the SEC, SOS of Delaware or any entity who is the CEO of CSHD? Does CSHD have any current bank accounts and if so is there any money and who controls it?

Since the court ruled that CSHD needed an attorney to file and defend on it's behalf and never obtained one, CSHD never answered the SEC complaint and therefore is in default and a default judgment could be entered against the company. No matter what Rufus, personally, filed it had no bearing on the case against CSHD since he had no standing.

I'm not an attorney so I am asking for answers here which should be public knowledge since CSHD is a public company. Until Rufus answers these questions with something other than emoticons everything he posts is BS.

This is about what we as shareholders can expect and should know. Until a company spokesperson steps up to plate and answers on the record with some proof to back up their assertions, it's all BS.

No softball questions here and I doubt these questions will get any answer other than me being a basher, short, part of a conspiracy etc etc.

LT, since you have become Rufus's spokesperson here on Allstocks, I ask you to pass this along. Since I was banned for asking the hard questions.

Until Rufus answers these questions, I will go back into hibernation on this thread because it's an exercise in futility.

I still own the shares that were posted on the NOBO list and have family members that own many more shares than I do since they didn't heed my advice and take money off the table prior to the SEC action. I consider my money lost and could give a hoot about it but deeply care about my family members who at this point have lost thousands upon thousands of dollars because they ordered certs, as per Rufus's request.

GLTA
Wally
 
Posted by LT on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by T e x:
ya, ya, ya...so what about these "contracts" ?

he cant answer that because he doesnt know..its just his Opinion....
 
Posted by LT on :
 
Wally it has been sent..
 
Posted by LT on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by thesource:
Man they are airing out the dirty laundry over on HSM pretty good . Too bad it took a year to do so ....

thats all hsm is good for.. throwing dirt around with nothing to back it up.....

a bunch of monkeys humping a football....
 
Posted by Mr. CATIAEngineer on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by thesource:
Man they are airing out the dirty laundry over on HSM pretty good . Too bad it took a year to do so ....

"They"?

If you are referring to Dogmando you do know thats James Gee correct? The guy that was buddies with Mike Alexander and recently threw him under the bus while "airing out the dirty laundry"....that guy? Theres nothing but finger pointing going on there....and hes digging himself a hole since he is blabbing on a Public Forum about an open case....one of which he gave a deposition for.

And its Sabra Dabbs for future reference. I have a feeling you will be hearing more of her soon.
 
Posted by T e x on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by LT:
quote:
Originally posted by thesource:
Man they are airing out the dirty laundry over on HSM pretty good . Too bad it took a year to do so ....

thats all hsm is good for.. throwing dirt around with nothing to back it up.....

a bunch of monkeys humping a football....

Isn't that one of the boards where you guys were running your frontloaded pumps?
 
Posted by Mr. CATIAEngineer on :
 
Ahhh sweet....I see Gee answered some of your questions over at H S M Wally. This one I find interesting......

"The bonds at one point were assigned to CSHD at one point up until approximately early November. The only JV's that ever received any money were Rufus's Equine Solutions and Ben's friends The Brittenum Bros "Twins". The others have had to seek funds from other places. I have had numerous conversations with Point Click and Dream, which IMO was the best of the JV's. They had only a initial investment of 1 million to get started and that would last for 6 months."

Sooooooo, hes saying the bonds were real...and they were assigned to CSHD. Hmmm
 
Posted by Mr. CATIAEngineer on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by T e x:
quote:
Originally posted by LT:
quote:
Originally posted by thesource:
Man they are airing out the dirty laundry over on HSM pretty good . Too bad it took a year to do so ....

thats all hsm is good for.. throwing dirt around with nothing to back it up.....

a bunch of monkeys humping a football....

Isn't that one of the boards where you guys were running your frontloaded pumps?
Thats a strong statement there dont ya think?
 
Posted by T e x on :
 
lol, "bonds were assigned"...
 
Posted by Mr. CATIAEngineer on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by T e x:
lol, "bonds were assigned"...

Try to spend less time analyzing the actual word he used and absorb the meaning of it. He is posting that AT LEAST one of the bonds were legit as far as he knows. I wonder how he "knows" that.......
 
Posted by T e x on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by Mr. CATIAEngineer:
quote:
Originally posted by T e x:
lol, "bonds were assigned"...

Try to spend less time analyzing the actual word he used and absorb the meaning of it. He is posting that AT LEAST one of the bonds were legit as far as he knows. I wonder how he "knows" that.......
Try to spend more time analyzing specific nuances rather than reading "meaning" into something. Sometimes, what's *not said* is as important or even more important than what is said.

Indeed, *how* would he know? Do we know his background? Does he have any expertise with bonds?
 
Posted by thesource on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by Mr. CATIAEngineer:
quote:
Originally posted by thesource:
Man they are airing out the dirty laundry over on HSM pretty good . Too bad it took a year to do so ....

"They"?

If you are referring to Dogmando you do know thats James Gee correct? The guy that was buddies with Mike Alexander and recently threw him under the bus while "airing out the dirty laundry"....that guy? Theres nothing but finger pointing going on there....and hes digging himself a hole since he is blabbing on a Public Forum about an open case....one of which he gave a deposition for.

And its Sabra Dabbs for future reference. I have a feeling you will be hearing more of her soon.

Maybe so but atleast he's answering questions and giving details . Thats a huge step in front of Dufus who answers a question with a question and straight up lies about lying , makes promises he has no intentions on keeping and keeps stringing this ignorant cult members along in hopes that enough people will complain to the SEC and they will allow this to all go away or make a special exception for the company to not have legal counsel .
 
Posted by thesource on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by LT:
quote:
Originally posted by T e x:
ya, ya, ya...so what about these "contracts" ?

he cant answer that because he doesnt know..its just his Opinion....
I haven't answered because I was out enjoying my weekend . As for contracts , I was referring to the filings posted in the Georgia county court that Dufus filed for the Ven. bonds . Maybe you wouldn't consider them contracts but I would since they involve more than one party that making an legal agreement to provide services for payment .
 
Posted by LT on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by thesource:
quote:
Originally posted by LT:
quote:
Originally posted by T e x:
ya, ya, ya...so what about these "contracts" ?

he cant answer that because he doesnt know..its just his Opinion....
I haven't answered because I was out enjoying my weekend . As for contracts , I was referring to the filings posted in the Georgia county court that Dufus filed for the Ven. bonds . Maybe you wouldn't consider them contracts but I would since they involve more than one party that making an legal agreement to provide services for payment .
lol..your are something i'll tell ya.....1st you say its cut and paste job , now you say they are contracts loaded onto a GOV. site... which is correct .... [Big Grin]
and yes they are REAL...like all the assets cshd has....
 
Posted by T e x on :
 
assets? really?

what are they?
 
Posted by thesource on :
 
Just because they were filed with the Georgia court doesn't make them real . I never said that . As for the assets being real , I never said they weren't real either , I just said CSHD and Dufus never owned them . If it does come out that they did infact own them but never did anything with them , then Dufus is even a bigger fool than I thought he was .
 
Posted by thesource on :
 
I have a feeling that LT and this person have a lot in common .......

 -
 
Posted by wallymac on :
 
GAO says SEC not using all its arsenal: report

Sun Dec 16, 1:04 PM ET

NEW YORK (Reuters) - The U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission is not using all of its available tools to police Wall Street, according to a U.S. government study.

The New York Times reported on Sunday that a study by the U.S. Government Accountability Office indicates that the SEC declines to use internal audits conducted by U.S. stock and options exchanges.

Also, the SEC's efforts to track questionable trading are hampered by a computer system that does not allow it to easily search investigative referrals from the exchanges, the paper says citing the GAO report, which is to be released on Monday.

The study was requested by Senator Charles E. Grassley of Iowa, the ranking Republican on the Senate Finance Committee, the paper says.

"They've got a computer system that can't search for the data the securities industry is reporting -- that's like working with one hand tied behind your back," Grassley is quoted as saying.

"And it was kind of shocking to know that the SEC doesn't review the exchanges' internal audits. That's inefficiency and there is no excuse for it," the senator added.

(Reporting by Chris Reiter, editing by Phil Berlowitz)
 
Posted by T e x on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by wallymac:
GAO says SEC not using all its arsenal: report

Sun Dec 16, 1:04 PM ET

NEW YORK (Reuters) - The U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission is not using all of its available tools to police Wall Street, according to a U.S. government study.

The New York Times reported on Sunday that a study by the U.S. Government Accountability Office indicates that the SEC declines to use internal audits conducted by U.S. stock and options exchanges.

Also, the SEC's efforts to track questionable trading are hampered by a computer system that does not allow it to easily search investigative referrals from the exchanges, the paper says citing the GAO report, which is to be released on Monday.

The study was requested by Senator Charles E. Grassley of Iowa, the ranking Republican on the Senate Finance Committee, the paper says.

"They've got a computer system that can't search for the data the securities industry is reporting -- that's like working with one hand tied behind your back," Grassley is quoted as saying.

"And it was kind of shocking to know that the SEC doesn't review the exchanges' internal audits. That's inefficiency and there is no excuse for it," the senator added.

(Reporting by Chris Reiter, editing by Phil Berlowitz)

nice find, good post...

btw--too funny--your "basic questions" made it from here to "there" then back to getting imported on da hub's CSHD thread. good stuff
 
Posted by wallymac on :
 
It's a crazy network. I guess it's like WiFi hunting for towers to bounce off of. LOL

Wally
 
Posted by T e x on :
 
Ya, sort of--is good to see who's serious about serious questions, and who's simply blowing more smoke. [Wink]
 
Posted by wallymac on :
 
Well, I had to go over to the Hub to see what the answer was. Isn't it funny that Rufus decided to answer Gee Baby(James Gee)'s answers to the questions instead of answering the questions themselves. He seems more interested in playing childish games on public boards than providing anything of substance.

I really didn't expect an answer to begin with because answering would have ended the fun he is having. Wouldn't he lose a majority of foolowers if he admitted there is no money, assets or JV's left?

It's winter bears hibernate so will I.

Wally

**********************************************

Posted by: aimgator
In reply to: None
Date:12/16/2007 12:30:19 PM
Post #of 155265

just got this Imed to me....(from Rufus board)


Originally Posted by wallymac
Wallumac: At this point, I don't want to deal in any of the past BS. I don't care if the default can be reopened. What I want to know is: If the bonds were real and the JV's? Are they still owned by CSHD or since no payments have been made on either has CSHD defaulted on them? (keep in mind this is assuming that everything is/was on the up and up.)

Gee Baby: The bonds at one point were assigned to CSHD at one point up until approximately early November. The only JV's that ever received any money were Rufus's Equine Solutions and Ben's friends The Brittenum Bros "Twins". The others have had to seek funds from other places. I have had numerous conversations with Point Click and Dream, which IMO was the best of the JV's. They had only a initial investment of 1 million to get started and that would last for 6 months.

Rufus: Sabra you will say anything!!!

Wallymac: According to my reading of the filings certain payments were due on the bonds. I have seen no evidence that those payments were made and therefore CSHD would be in default on those agreements just as they would be in default on the JV's since no payments were made on those either.

Gee Baby: The debt service of the bonds was never paid by CSHD so they were in default and hence allowed the bonds to be retracted.

Rufus: Such a stupid statement this is, He He He

Wallumac: So, what assets would CSHD have? Legally, by the SEC, SOS of Delaware or any entity who is the CEO of CSHD? Does CSHD have any current bank accounts and if so is there any money and who controls it?

Gee Baby: The SEC told me that Judge Cooper asked them why the company was not being placed in receivership back in June and the SEC said that receivers cost money and CSHD is broke. The 2 bank accounts have 3 signatures Rufus, Ben and Darrell Horton (Bens Cousin). At last check in January one was empty and the other had 12,000 in it.

Rufus: You are such a liar, the answer that I gave to the Judge on the first day of court and the exhibits is the reason the SEC was not granted receivership by the Judge, the SEC asked for such but was denied!!!! He He He any legal person with tell you this!!!

Also receivership is a federal cost and has nothing to do with the bank accounts available!!! He He He you are only showing how ignorant you are about the truth!!

Wallymac: Since the court ruled that CSHD needed an attorney to file and defend on it's behalf and never obtained one, CSHD never answered the SEC complaint and therefore is in default and a default judgment could be entered against the company. No matter what Rufus, personally, filed it had no bearing on the case against CSHD since he had no standing.

I'm not an attorney so I am asking for answers here which should be public knowledge since CSHD is a public company. Until Rufus answers these questions with something other than emoticons everything he posts is BS.

This is about what we as shareholders can expect and should know. Until a company spokesperson steps up to plate and answers on the record with some proof to back up their assertions, it's all BS.

No softball questions here and I doubt these questions will get any answer other than me being a basher, short, part of a conspiracy etc etc.

Until Rufus answers these questions, I will go back into hibernation on this thread because it's an exercise in futility.

I still own the shares that were posted on the NOBO list and have family members that own many more shares than I do since they didn't heed my advice and take money off the table prior to the SEC action. I consider my money lost and could give a hoot about it but deeply care about my family members who at this point have lost thousands upon thousands of dollars because they ordered certs, as per Rufus's request.

Gee baby: Rufus not obtaining an attorney has been my biggest concern since the suit began. We had a SHC conference call with Rufus, Ben and Dewayne Woods where Mr Woods asked us to raise 200K to retain an attorney.

My family and friends still own every share they bought so I sympathize with your position as I am in the same boat. That is one of the major reasons I did what I did with the SHC. I was trying to protect and salvage our investment. I believe the only hope for the company is to have the SEC take care of Rufus and clean the company up and someone to pick it up as a shell.

Rufus: Good Play, Gee Baby All you and Artlitt via the SHC committee tried to do is to get me to sign off on a new MM so you could dump more shares!!! Just ask some of the SHC not everyone is liars!!!

Originally Posted by Mike_Honcho
Where we have people coming back together on the same page is not that possibly Rufus and Bonds etc.. have been legit this entire time- instead people are actually digging and looking to expose the other large # of dirtbags involved in this entire thing.

If in the end CSHD was real thats golden...if not then its ok...if during this witch hunt we expose and find the other 10-20 dirtbags involved in this entire charade then at least I will be satisfied with the price of admission

Time to zonk out- RW proceed to talk to yourself for the evening

Gee Baby: CSHD was real at one point with a great business plan but that plan was never realized. It is illegal to take in assets to increase your stock price. Rufus never did anything with the asset but artifically blow up the stock price and allow his friends and family to sell. What was Rufus's plan to collect asset upon asset and never use them. WHY???

Rufus: Stupid is as Stupid types

Originally Posted by phil
So what am I missing here? The bond was legit, the bond agreement was legit, there was even a c&d validating it's legitimacy.

And the sec still claims the bond was never cshd's in the first place? How can that be?

Gee Baby: Alana Black said that if the bonds were to be acted upon it would have proved ownership. The Ven Bond appeared to be legit but never drawn on. That in their opinion was the pump and plan phase. The dump happened when his relatives sold. The reason they are getting him for the plan was that they are having trouble tracking if he received any money from it.

Rufus: Will you ever stop with the lies, Newly filed court documents will prove your are such a liar, Oh well I have had enough fun for the day!!!
 
Posted by T e x on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by wallymac:
Well, I had to go over to the Hub to see what the answer was. Isn't it funny that Rufus decided to answer Gee Baby(James Gee)'s answers to the questions instead of answering the questions themselves. He seems more interested in playing childish games on public boards than providing anything of substance.

I really didn't expect an answer to begin with because answering would have ended the fun he is having. Wouldn't he lose a majority of foolowers if he admitted there is no money, assets or JV's left?

It's winter bears hibernate so will I.

Wally

**********************************************

Posted by: aimgator
In reply to: None
Date:12/16/2007 12:30:19 PM
Post #of 155265

just got this Imed to me....(from Rufus board)


Originally Posted by wallymac
Wallumac: At this point, I don't want to deal in any of the past BS. I don't care if the default can be reopened. What I want to know is: If the bonds were real and the JV's? Are they still owned by CSHD or since no payments have been made on either has CSHD defaulted on them? (keep in mind this is assuming that everything is/was on the up and up.)

Gee Baby: The bonds at one point were assigned to CSHD at one point up until approximately early November. The only JV's that ever received any money were Rufus's Equine Solutions and Ben's friends The Brittenum Bros "Twins". The others have had to seek funds from other places. I have had numerous conversations with Point Click and Dream, which IMO was the best of the JV's. They had only a initial investment of 1 million to get started and that would last for 6 months.

Rufus: Sabra you will say anything!!!

Wallymac: According to my reading of the filings certain payments were due on the bonds. I have seen no evidence that those payments were made and therefore CSHD would be in default on those agreements just as they would be in default on the JV's since no payments were made on those either.

Gee Baby: The debt service of the bonds was never paid by CSHD so they were in default and hence allowed the bonds to be retracted.

Rufus: Such a stupid statement this is, He He He

Wallumac: So, what assets would CSHD have? Legally, by the SEC, SOS of Delaware or any entity who is the CEO of CSHD? Does CSHD have any current bank accounts and if so is there any money and who controls it?

Gee Baby: The SEC told me that Judge Cooper asked them why the company was not being placed in receivership back in June and the SEC said that receivers cost money and CSHD is broke. The 2 bank accounts have 3 signatures Rufus, Ben and Darrell Horton (Bens Cousin). At last check in January one was empty and the other had 12,000 in it.

Rufus: You are such a liar, the answer that I gave to the Judge on the first day of court and the exhibits is the reason the SEC was not granted receivership by the Judge, the SEC asked for such but was denied!!!! He He He any legal person with tell you this!!!

Also receivership is a federal cost and has nothing to do with the bank accounts available!!! He He He you are only showing how ignorant you are about the truth!!

Wallymac: Since the court ruled that CSHD needed an attorney to file and defend on it's behalf and never obtained one, CSHD never answered the SEC complaint and therefore is in default and a default judgment could be entered against the company. No matter what Rufus, personally, filed it had no bearing on the case against CSHD since he had no standing.

I'm not an attorney so I am asking for answers here which should be public knowledge since CSHD is a public company. Until Rufus answers these questions with something other than emoticons everything he posts is BS.

This is about what we as shareholders can expect and should know. Until a company spokesperson steps up to plate and answers on the record with some proof to back up their assertions, it's all BS.

No softball questions here and I doubt these questions will get any answer other than me being a basher, short, part of a conspiracy etc etc.

Until Rufus answers these questions, I will go back into hibernation on this thread because it's an exercise in futility.

I still own the shares that were posted on the NOBO list and have family members that own many more shares than I do since they didn't heed my advice and take money off the table prior to the SEC action. I consider my money lost and could give a hoot about it but deeply care about my family members who at this point have lost thousands upon thousands of dollars because they ordered certs, as per Rufus's request.

Gee baby: Rufus not obtaining an attorney has been my biggest concern since the suit began. We had a SHC conference call with Rufus, Ben and Dewayne Woods where Mr Woods asked us to raise 200K to retain an attorney.

My family and friends still own every share they bought so I sympathize with your position as I am in the same boat. That is one of the major reasons I did what I did with the SHC. I was trying to protect and salvage our investment. I believe the only hope for the company is to have the SEC take care of Rufus and clean the company up and someone to pick it up as a shell.

Rufus: Good Play, Gee Baby All you and Artlitt via the SHC committee tried to do is to get me to sign off on a new MM so you could dump more shares!!! Just ask some of the SHC not everyone is liars!!!

Originally Posted by Mike_Honcho
Where we have people coming back together on the same page is not that possibly Rufus and Bonds etc.. have been legit this entire time- instead people are actually digging and looking to expose the other large # of dirtbags involved in this entire thing.

If in the end CSHD was real thats golden...if not then its ok...if during this witch hunt we expose and find the other 10-20 dirtbags involved in this entire charade then at least I will be satisfied with the price of admission

Time to zonk out- RW proceed to talk to yourself for the evening

Gee Baby: CSHD was real at one point with a great business plan but that plan was never realized. It is illegal to take in assets to increase your stock price. Rufus never did anything with the asset but artifically blow up the stock price and allow his friends and family to sell. What was Rufus's plan to collect asset upon asset and never use them. WHY???

Rufus: Stupid is as Stupid types

Originally Posted by phil
So what am I missing here? The bond was legit, the bond agreement was legit, there was even a c&d validating it's legitimacy.

And the sec still claims the bond was never cshd's in the first place? How can that be?

Gee Baby: Alana Black said that if the bonds were to be acted upon it would have proved ownership. The Ven Bond appeared to be legit but never drawn on. That in their opinion was the pump and plan phase. The dump happened when his relatives sold. The reason they are getting him for the plan was that they are having trouble tracking if he received any money from it.

Rufus: Will you ever stop with the lies, Newly filed court documents will prove your are such a liar, Oh well I have had enough fun for the day!!!

implosion, man...

the more confusion, the better...and the less likely there's a shareholder lawsuit. There's a time limit for such actions, you do know that, right?
 
Posted by LT on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by T e x:
assets? really?

what are they?

did you say assets ?..... [Big Grin]

1) Go here: http://tinyurl.com/3c6emk

2) Select the "Name" , then pick "Starts with" from the drop down menu. Then type in "conversion solutions" and search.

.
 
Posted by thesource on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by LT:
quote:
Originally posted by T e x:
assets? really?

what are they?

did you say assets ?..... [Big Grin]

1) Go here: http://tinyurl.com/3c6emk

2) Select the "Name" , then pick "Starts with" from the drop down menu. Then type in "conversion solutions" and search.

.

CONVERSION SOLUTIONS HOLDI - ORD SHS
US21254V1008
026510031

USD
01 May 2006


D
STOCK
09 Oct 2006


Big freaking deal , it says nothing about any bonds . It states the market type as stocks . If I remember correctly , the SEC determined that these were stocks of CSHD owned by another person in Europe .
 
Posted by thesource on :
 
I guess Google is in the bonds business as well huh ????

GOOGLE INC-CL A
US38259P5089
019820009

USD



D
STOCK
29 Mar 2006
 
Posted by thesource on :
 
Heck they even have some bonds in Euro denomination as well ....... No wonder google is trading so high .

GOOGLE INC -CBF/CREA

020690798

EUR



F
STOCK
24 Sep 2007
 
Posted by Igor R on :
 
You know source, for someone who sold out a long time ago, thinks this has no prospects, definitely hates rufus & co, and said you were going to stay out of this thread, you definitely have been a bit contradictory yourself.
 
Posted by Mr. CATIAEngineer on :
 
Source....if you are still so interested in CSHD even after selling you can find some interesting reading here......

http://www.gabreeders.com/interestingandcool.html

I know you are going to say "those are just documents" but there are some new names thrown into the mix to DD if you are bored. Enjoy.
 
Posted by LT on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by Mr. CATIAEngineer:
Source....if you are still so interested in CSHD even after selling you can find some interesting reading here......

http://www.gabreeders.com/interestingandcool.html

I know you are going to say "those are just documents" but there are some new names thrown into the mix to DD if you are bored. Enjoy.

LOL...source will find some way to spin this also...i almost feel bad for him when we get our due reward for being patient.. [Big Grin]

watch and document people.!!...

http://gabreeders.com/interestingandcool.html

lots more to come...its gona get VERY Interesting over the next few weeks.... [Big Grin]
 
Posted by LT on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by Igor R:
You know source, for someone who sold out a long time ago, thinks this has no prospects, definitely hates rufus & co, and said you were going to stay out of this thread, you definitely have been a bit contradictory yourself.

i agree igor... he would be better off just stayin out of here ....my question is why stay if you have no intrest ( shares ) in a company anyways ?...lol...what does he stand to gain ?..hes already lost by selling...( bad move )...
 
Posted by thesource on :
 
So whats your take LT on the info I posted ???? You didn't seem to have anything to say about it . As for staying off the thread , that was the other thread not this one . Infact I was the one who brought it back from the dead so people can continue to read the crap posted and maybe learn a valuable lesson from reading the 1231234124351235412 pages of BS on CSHD .
 
Posted by Igor R on :
 
The lesson learned would be to take profits off the top, to diversify, never use money you cant afford to lose, and never trust a pink/otcbb stock. Theres no need for pages upon pages of you constantly bashing the stock. You just keep saying the same thing over and over, if you had some new and constructive that would be one thing; however, thats not the case.
 
Posted by thesource on :
 
But does anyone have anything new or constructive ? All I see are repost of info from Dufus or James G. in which one side is calling the other side a liar and a scammer yet people cannot get enough of it . None of it really matters as I've said before , the company has a default judgement against it and thats that . Rufus should have ante'd up and got a lawyer this time last year or honestly should have had one on retainer since day 1 .
 
Posted by Igor R on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by thesource:
But does anyone have anything new or constructive ? All I see are repost of info from Dufus or James G. in which one side is calling the other side a liar and a scammer yet people cannot get enough of it . None of it really matters as I've said before , the company has a default judgement against it and thats that . Rufus should have ante'd up and got a lawyer this time last year or honestly should have had one on retainer since day 1 .

I agree with you there hasn't really been anything constructive to come out as of like the last half year but nevertheless your posting is equally as nonconstructive as theirs.
 
Posted by LT on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by thesource:
But does anyone have anything new or constructive ? All I see are repost of info from Dufus or James G. in which one side is calling the other side a liar and a scammer yet people cannot get enough of it . None of it really matters as I've said before , the company has a default judgement against it and thats that . Rufus should have ante'd up and got a lawyer this time last year or honestly should have had one on retainer since day 1 .

Sour-source . since the stock still trades , it isn't in recievership..has an active court case...it has Shareholders which most hold HCC's.... there is a reason to post new DD , pacer filings , postings from the CEO..etc.... your post's are NON-Constructive and frankly the same crap everyday .... so i'll ask again why do you spend so much time wasted on a stock that you have no intrest in ( shares )... is it to make fun or be-little the shareholders that are here ?....what a waste of time...get a life.. [Big Grin]
 
Posted by Mr. CATIAEngineer on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by thesource:
But does anyone have anything new or constructive ? All I see are repost of info from Dufus or James G. in which one side is calling the other side a liar and a scammer yet people cannot get enough of it . None of it really matters as I've said before , the company has a default judgement against it and thats that . Rufus should have ante'd up and got a lawyer this time last year or honestly should have had one on retainer since day 1 .

Well his explanation for not having a lawyer is that the lawyers wanted him to back out of the merger. I suspect they know what he knows and didnt think he should tangle with the guys that were running the show when Rufus came along. Obviously backing out of the merger was not what he wanted to do so hence no lawyer. That and he said "I have the information....they dont!".

Ok, now that ive brought you up to date on the lawyer thing did you get a chance to look over those documents i put a link up for today?
 
Posted by LT on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by Mr. CATIAEngineer:
quote:
Originally posted by thesource:
But does anyone have anything new or constructive ? All I see are repost of info from Dufus or James G. in which one side is calling the other side a liar and a scammer yet people cannot get enough of it . None of it really matters as I've said before , the company has a default judgement against it and thats that . Rufus should have ante'd up and got a lawyer this time last year or honestly should have had one on retainer since day 1 .

Well his explanation for not having a lawyer is that the lawyers wanted him to back out of the merger. I suspect they know what he knows and didnt think he should tangle with the guys that were running the show when Rufus came along. Obviously backing out of the merger was not what he wanted to do so hence no lawyer. That and he said "I have the information....they dont!".

Ok, now that ive brought you up to date on the lawyer thing did you get a chance to look over those documents i put a link up for today?

hes looked... hes prolly trying to find a way to spin it...lol...j/k source.... many more to come also ...keep watching !!...this is just the start !..also keep your eye on Pacer !
 
Posted by thesource on :
 
Rufus can come up with as many excuses for not having legal counsel as the share holders are willing to listen to but the law is the law . The only way a person can represent themself is a term called PRO SE . You cannot represent anyone but yourself . If the company was Rufus P. Harris D.B.A Conversion Solutions Holdings then it would be a sole proprietorship and a totally different situation but this is not the case and has never been .

Rufus has tried from the beginning to seperate himself from the company to represent himself but continues to file motions that include the company . This will not fly in Federal court or even in a simple small claims court of law . He's too damn stupid and stubborn to admit it . The company has not gone into receivership LT and I have never said it has . The next step after the default is going to be to divide up the assets if the company actually has any which I will bet you azz they do not and the company will be put into receivership . As for the actual shell itself , it might continue to trade or it might not . I am not experienced with that part of a publically traded company . I would assume that will be up to the person or persons in charge of the receivership process .

As for PACER , Dufus can file anything he'd like at this point but its merely in vain . As I've said before , a default judgement is non appealable and I am not aware of any situations where it can be put aside especially for some lame azz excuse like Dufus has come up with so far . I am sure the judge is getting a real kick from this idiot and his little games .
 
Posted by a surfer on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by Mr. CATIAEngineer:
Source....if you are still so interested in CSHD even after selling you can find some interesting reading here......

http://www.gabreeders.com/interestingandcool.html

I know you are going to say "those are just documents" but there are some new names thrown into the mix to DD if you are bored. Enjoy.

Hmmm.
 
Posted by TimW on :
 
Theres a bond listed for 1.5 billion euro.. todays value would put that at 2.1 billion US.

Has no CSHD/CVSU/Rufus name anywhere in the doc though.
 
Posted by TimW on :
 
I do believe our discovery deadline is coming up (January 22nd, 2008), before it enters trial.

Wonder what evidence the SEC can gather in one month because as of now they really squat.
 
Posted by thesource on :
 
Orig. State
GA Orig. Juris.

none found
User Desig.
0100 Agency Case No.

Name Arrestee Used
HARRIS, RUFUS JR Date of Arrest
Sep 12 2005 Offender Tracking No.
001


Judicial Record

Judicial Agency
COLQUITT COUNTY SUPERIOR COURT Case Number
Date Case Appealed
Judicial Court Count
01
Court Count 1
01 Court Disp. Date
Feb 15 2006 Judicial Citation
40-5-58(C) General Offense

none found

Judicial Offense
HABITUAL VIOLATOR Offense Literal
Court Provision Code
Court Disposition
CONVICTED
Suspended Sentence
Confinement Sentence
120D-365D Probation Sentence
5Y Fine Sentence
 
Posted by TimW on :
 
Are you trying to say the SEC will come to court with an arrest for a DUI over 2 years earlier than the trial day?

Thatd be pretty funny.

Your honor, we the SEC would like you to rule in our favor becaues Rufus was arrested 2 years ago for a DUI.

Dismissed.
 
Posted by thesource on :
 
No but he could very well be picked up at court if he's got a bench warrant from the failure to appear on his last DUI court setting . I would also bet they are going to MTR (motion to revoke) his current probation since he's received another DUI charge .

None of this has anything to do with the SEC case , I just thought it was funny where it said "HABITUAL VIOLATOR" . That sounds like Dufus to me ........
 
Posted by glassman on :
 
LOL source sounds like you have spent too much time in the system [Big Grin]
 
Posted by thesource on :
 
Owning several businesses and dealing with legal issues though out my life , I've picked up a few things along the way . I am very famaliar with suits (mainly in the small claims courts of Texas) but some bigger ones as well . Now days , no one can deal with each other person to person and figure things out , everyone files suit against each other and clogs up the civil courts with B/S suits . I am sure the SEC has a crap load of suits filed against publically traded companies and CSHD is just one of a whole bunch just in the Georgia district alone .
 
Posted by glassman on :
 
I am sure the SEC has a crap load of suits filed against publically traded companies and CSHD is just one of a whole bunch just in the Georgia district alone .

hint:

there is a place where you can actually look that up instead of guessing...

i for one expect the SEC to make a good case in spite of the fact that Rufufu doesn't follow process.

you haven't got a clue just how many "dirty tricks" are played in the market do you?

you have focused on this one because you feel burned, but there's a hundred a day that people just ignore.
 
Posted by thesource on :
 
Oh I have no doubt about the number of cases filed daily or weekly with the SEC .
 
Posted by glassman on :
 
there's hundreds that go by unnoticed by the SEC, or uncomplained about to the SEC too...

if i could make a suggestion? being rude to people for sticking to this play is bad karma.

they are either going to win or lose and you're uh,less than polite input odds no value to the board...

if people were promising, say 15$ dollars a share, [Big Grin] ? then you would be adding value by trying to point out that it prolly won't happen. some of us actually did that, and recommended taking profits and protecting capital as it went up... others were determined to stay in for the "reset"...

currently? this thing is pretty dead, and more than a few of us are interested to see the final disposition, even if we don't have any $ to gain out of it...
Rufufu? he's lost IMO... but there's other issues here....

esp if the bonds did exist at one time, or are still there...

the SEC is run by people... say you wanna short a stock? and you have a pretty good idea that something is wrong? it doesn't hurt to report them to the SEC does it? the SEC should be able to make its case no problem if things are as bad they appear...
people do make mistakes on occasion, and no i'm not saying they did or didn't here, but i wanna see the goods laid out on the table...

and that will only happen if peopl keep pushing...

scamsters depend on people not admitting they got scammed, or and they depend on the system to not follow thru cuz there's other stuff that's more important, but it's really all important...
 
Posted by Ocqueoc on :
 
Glassman,
Thank you, thank you!!
I do not post very often anymore because there was a source of irritation on here "all the time"
I will not add more because I do not want to be rude.

Miss chatting with most of ya.
 
Posted by LT on :
 
Pacer Filings !!!

VERIFIED MOTION TO COMPEL DISCOVERY AND
MOTION FOR SANCTIONS FOR FAILING TO DISCLOSE


COMES NOW the Defendant, RUFUS PAUL HARRIS, a/k/a

PAUL RUFUS HARRIS, and moves this Court to compel discovery/

disclosure and allow this defendant all allowable discovery

prior to a hearing on the pending motions, also to further

expand the time allowed for the Defendant to file pleadings

and affidavits to supplement his Motion For Reconsideration

until such time as the Plaintiffs produce all discovery

contemplated under Rules 26, 27, 30, 34, 36 and 45 of

the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, and Local Federal Rules

26, 26.1, 26.3, 30, 37, 37.1, and further moves this Court to

impose sanctions against the Plaintiff and its individual

Attorneys, including, but not limited to a dismissal of

Plaintiff’s Complaint and in support thereof states the

following under oath:

1) The Defendant, Rufus Paul Harris made a general

appearance in this case before this Court on October 30,

2006, submitted documents to this Court as a defense to

Plaintiff’s Complaint, said defense documents were placed

under seal by this Court and executed a Consent agreement

with the Plaintiff, also filed with the Court on November

7, 2006.

2) Rule 26 F.R.C.P. provides, in part as follows:
(a) Required Disclosures; Methods to Discover
Additional Matter.
(1) Initial Disclosures.
Except in categories of proceedings specified in
Rule 26(a)(1)(E), or to the extent otherwise
stipulated or directed by order, a party must,
without awaiting a discovery request, provide to
other parties:
(A) the name and, if known, the address and
telephone number of each individual likely to
have discoverable information that the disclosing
party may use to support its claims or defenses,
unless solely for impeachment, identifying the
subjects of the information;
(B) a copy of, or a description by category and
location of, all documents, electronically stored
information, and tangible things that are in the
possession, custody, or control of the party and
that the disclosing party may use to support its
claims or defenses, unless solely for impeachment;
(C) a computation of any category of damages
claimed by the disclosing party, making available
for inspection and copying as under Rule 34, the
documents or other evidentiary material, not
privileged or protected from disclosure, on which
such computation is based, including materials
bearing on the nature and extent of injuries
suffered.
A party must make its initial disclosures based on
the information then reasonably available to it and
is not excused from making its disclosures because
it has not fully completed its investigation of the
case or because it challenges the sufficiency of
another party's disclosures or because another
party has not made its disclosures.
(Emphasis added)


3) Pursuant to Rule 26 of the Federal Rules of Civil

Procedure, the Plaintiff’s attorneys and the Defendant talked

on November 3rd & 6th 2006 to consider the nature and basis of

their claims and defenses and the possibilities for a prompt

settlement or resolution of the case, to make or arrange

for the disclosures required by Rule 26(a)(1), to discuss

any issues relating to preserving discoverable information,

and to develop a proposed discovery plan.

4) Pursuant to the agreement at the aforesaid Rule 26

meeting, the Defendant furnished a deposition and provided

all relevant information and documents in the Defendant’s

possession to the Plaintiff. The Plaintiff agreed to obtain

the trading records for the Defendant corporation (CSHD)

and further promised to send the Defendant a copy of his

and/or allowing the Defendant a copy of all depositions,

affidavits, statements and other documentation obtained

from any other source, including third parties.

5) The Plaintiff and its attorneys failed to disclose

or furnish anything at all to the Defendant at the initial

meeting as they are required to do, including, but not

limited to the disclosure of everything that could have led

to halting the trading of Conversion Solutions stock in the

first place; said halt causing the loss to CSHD shareholders

of hundreds of millions of dollars and raising more than mere

suspicions that the halt by the Plaintiff was for improper

reasons with no evidentiary basis at all.

6) The Plaintiff and its attorneys, with total

disregard for Rule 26 F.R.C.P., have failed to disclose,

furnish or provide anything to the Defendant pursuant to the

agreement at said Rule 26 meeting and in fact, the attorneys

for the Plaintiff kept the Defendant in negotiations by

promising to provide trading records and other disclosure

until after they caused the Clerk to improperly file a

default against the Defendant, contrary to the agreement at

said meeting, contrary to the provisions of Rule 26 F.R.C.P

and contrary to the fact that this Defendant had made an

appearance before this Court, submitted evidence in his

defense to the Court and filed pleadings in this case in the

form of the consent agreement filed with the Court. All of

the foregoing actually constituted enough appearance, filing

of pleadings and defense evidence filed with the Court to

preclude the entry of a default by the Clerk. Any default

against the Defendant must have come out of a noticed hearing

and an order from this Court, not from the Clerk.

7) The failure of the Plaintiff to obtain and disclose

the trading records for the Defendant Corporation (CSHD)

shows a material and intentional disregard for the rights

of the Defendant and the shareholders of CSHD, or in the

alternative, those records would vindicate this

Defendant and the corporation and would actually show that

the Plaintiff had absolutely no reason to halt the stock

from trading and had no reason for the filing of the

lawsuit, especially when those very trading records are

needed by the Plaintiff to prove the largest allegation of

their complaint, which was a “pump and dump” scheme by this

Defendant.

8) The Plaintiff and its attorneys have done all they

could to deny this Defendant his “due process” and in doing

so have violated Rule 26, F.R C.P as well as Local Court

rule 26 by withholding any and all information, documents,

records or anything else of an evidentiary nature that this

Defendant would have needed to file an answer, defenses and

counterclaims.

9) Rule 26(a)(1) requires all disclosure to be

furnished by the Plaintiff and its attorneys even without a

discovery request from this Defendant and is further

required to supplement that disclosure as it is obtained

under Rule 26(e), F.R.C.P.. The Plaintiff and its attorneys

did none of the above; instead of furnishing any disclosure

to the Defendant, they just withheld disclosure and tricked

him into a default situation so he wouldn’t be able to file

an answer. The Plaintiff’s attorneys still continued to

negotiate with the Defendant thereafter for an extended

period of time until he attempted to file his first answer

and then dropped any and all communications with said

Defendant by using the Clerk’s default as a shield.

10) The Defendant needs the opportunity to have the

Plaintiff and its attorneys deposed to verify the facts

contained in this motion, as well as secure the disclosure

that he has been denied due to the unethical practices of

the Plaintiff’s attorneys. Defendant is guaranteed these

rights even after the default because no Default Judgment

was entered by the Clerk and all further proceedings needed

to be done before this Court and the Defendant is entitled to

discovery to prepare for the final hearing.

11) The Plaintiff had seized the records of the

Defendant and would not grant the Defendant access to those

records or any other records in the possession or control

of the Plaintiff, thus denying the Defendant the ability to

file his answer in the past or even now without disclosure

by the Plaintiff.

12) The Defendant hereby certifies that he has made a

good faith attempt on multiple occasions, pursuant to Rule

37(a)(2), F.R.C.P., and Local Rule 37 to confer with Alana

Black and other attorneys in the office of the Plaintiff in

an effort to resolve the discovery dispute and secure copies

of the CSHD trading records, depositions, statements and/or

affidavits without Court action but all efforts have been

repulsed or just ignored by the Plaintiff’s attorneys,

contrary to the provisions of Rule 26 F.R.C.P and Local Rule

26.

13) This is a case of great public interest which

affects thousands of innocent shareholders as well as the

integrity of the Plaintiff and its attorneys. To avoid the

appearance of any impropriety, favor or prejudice, this

Court must allow proper discovery and hold the Plaintiff’s

attorneys accountable should it become known that this

entire lawsuit was filed to protect large naked short

sellers rather than to protect the innocent shareholders of

CSHD.

14) The actions and the integrity of the Plaintiff

(SEC) and its attorneys have come into public scrutiny

recently and this case is a classic example of the SEC

“unclean hands” and of some of the abuses of the Court

process that come into question. The failure of the Plaintiff

and its attorneys to allow or furnish any required disclosure

to the Defendant, as required by Rule 26 F.R.C.P as well as

other discovery Rules should be dealt with harshly by this

Court in the form of appropriate sanctions, fines, dismissal

of the case or any such other punishment deemed appropriate

by this Court, along with a referral to the U.S. Attorney

General and the Georgia Bar Association for Investigation.

15) The Defendant requires an extended period beyond his

previously requested January 2nd 2008 date to supplement his

initial Motion to Set Aside Default and Motion For

Reconsideration because of the time involved for discovery.

The time extension needed is for 60 days after the Plaintiff

complies with and furnishes the discovery allowed under the

Federal Rules of Civil Procedure.

15) The Defendant requests an open hearing before this

Court, as due process requires, and an opportunity to argue

and defend this Defendant’s position.

WHEREFORE, THE Defendant, RUFUS PAUL HARRIS, a/k/a

PAUL RUFUS HARRIS, moves this Court for an Order compelling

discovery from the Plaintiff, including, but not limited to

taking the depositions of Officers of the Plaintiff and

Plaintiff’s attorneys and an extension of time to supplement

previous pleadings; Plaintiff further moves for sanctions to

be entered against the Plaintiff and its attorneys for

refusing to allow the Defendant any discovery further.


I, RUFUS PAUL HARRIS a/k/a PAUL RUFUS HARRIS, after

being duly sworn according to law, do state and affirm,

under penalty of perjury, that the facts set forth in

the foregoing VERIFIED MOTION TO COMPEL DISCOVERY AND

MOTION FOR SANCTIONS FOR FAILING TO DISCLOSE are true and

correct to my best knowledge and belief.

 
Posted by LT on :
 
Second filing!!!

SUPPLEMENTAL AFFIDAVIT IN SUPPORT OF MOTION FOR RECONSIDERATION AND IN OPPOSITION TO PLAINTIFF’S MOTION FOR DEFAULT JUDGMENT AND SUPPORTING MEMORANDUM OF LAW


COMES NOW the Defendant, RUFUS PAUL HARRIS, a/k/a

PAUL RUFUS HARRIS, and, after being duly sworn, states

that the following statements and facts are true and

correct to the best of his knowledge and belief:

1) General Affirmations:

A) This Defendant has a meritorious defense to

all of the allegations contained in Plaintiff’s

Complaint; however, all of the Defendant’s records were

seized and are in the possession and control of the

Plaintiff and its attorneys. The Defendant has been

prevented from properly formulating any timely answer

due to the refusal and/or failure of the Plaintiff and

its attorneys to make required disclosures to the

defendant.
B) F.R.C.P.Rule 55. Default; Default Judgment
Provides in part:
(a) Entering a Default.
When a party against whom a judgment for
affirmative relief is sought has failed to plead or
otherwise defend, and that failure is shown by
affidavit or otherwise, the clerk must enter the
party’s default.

The Defendant, Rufus Paul Harris made a general

appearance in this case before this Court on October 30,

2006, submitted documents to this Court as a defense to

Plaintiff’s Complaint which were placed under seal by this

Court. Defendant also executed a Consent agreement

with the Plaintiff which was filed with the Court on November

7, 2006. It is this Defendant’s opinion that he has defended

within the provisions of Rule 55(a) to preclude the entry of

a default by the Clerk and has been denied due process under

the 14th Amendment to the U.S. Constitution.


C) On or about the 30th day of October and the

1st day of November 2006, the Defendant furnished a

deposition and otherwise provided all relevant information

and documents in the Defendants possession to the

Plaintiff. On or about the above stated dates, the

Plaintiff agreed to obtain the trading records for the

Defendant corporation (CSHD) and further promised to send

the Defendant a copy of his deposition for reading and

signing, further more the Plaintiff agreed to furnish the

Defendant a copy of all depositions, affidavits, statements

and other documentation obtained from any other source,

including third parties.


2) The Plaintiff and its attorneys failed to disclose

or furnish anything at all to the Defendant at the initial

meeting or subsequent thereto as they are required to do,

including, but not limited to the disclosure of everything

that could possibly have led to halting the trading of

Conversion Solutions stock (CSHD)in the first place. The halt

by the Plaintiff and its attorneys has caused the loss to

CSHD shareholders of hundreds of millions of dollars and it

also raises more than mere suspicions that the halt by the

Plaintiff was for improper reasons with no evidentiary basis

at all.


3) Conversion Solutions (CSHD) had merged with Fronthaul

Group, Inc. (FHAL) and shareholders of FHAL and CSHD who held

shares prior to October 16, 2006 of either corporation were

to receive an additional 6 shares of Conversion (CSHD) stock

for each one they held prior to that date via the Merger

agreement. The NASD dividends department and the SEC

contacted me and requested to make the 6 to 1 issuance a

forward dividend with a Ex-Dividend date forward for 45 days.

I refused to do so and was then contacted by the Atlanta

Enforcement Office with accusation of a “Pump and Dump”

scheme.


4) The entire float of FHAL and CSHD was completely sold

out prior to the merger completion. The merger and

the 6 additional shares, as I had it set up, would have

exposed those who had “Naked Shorted” hundreds of millions of

illegal shares of FHAL and CSHD and further exposed the fact

that the SEC has knowingly allowed this practice to go on

unregulated and with no prosecutions and just looked the

other way.


5) The 6 for 1 forward split would have protected the

influential “Naked Short Sellers” and also saved the SEC from

embarrassment for allowing it to go on, so they halted the

stock (CSHD) and allowed those participating in the illegal

activity to get rich, protecting those involved in the

illegal activity, all at the expense of the innocent

shareholders.


6) I was engaged in settlement talks with the attorneys

for the Plaintiff (SEC) prior to and after the default was

entered by the Clerk about settlement of the case. Alana

Black and Bill Hicks told me that if I agreed to return the

CSHD Convertible Note Holders money that they would drop

everything and dismiss the case. I responded by asking her to

provide me the violated regulation by and through issuing the

Convertible Notes. She never returned or discussed the issue

again.

7)Rule 15c2-11 of the General Rules and Regulations
promulgated under the Securities Exchange Act of 1934
requires specified information by market makers prior to
initiation or resumption of quotations for stocks.
The Plaintiff and its attorneys allowed the shares of

Conversion Solutions (CSHD) to resume trading after the halt

without enforcing the compliance with Rule 15c2-11. If

discovery is allowed I can prove that the current trading

Market Makers and Broker dealers are still trading CSHD

through the quotation process in direct violation of

this rule and that the Plaintiffs knowingly have ignored this

illegal practice. The Plaintiffs and its attorneys allowed

the trading of CSHD to resume even though I requested that

the halt remain in place to the SEC and this Court the first

day of proceedings. The resumption in trading allowed more

naked shorting and trading of illegal shares that did not

exist and caused the innocent shareholders further losses.


8) During the negotiations with Alana Black and Bill

Hicks, I told Alana Black that I was going to draw down on

one of the bonds in question to prove it was real and valid,

But Alana told me that it would still be considered as fraud

If I tried to do that.


9) At one point during the negotiations, I supplied

$2,000,000,000.00 in treasury checks to Alana Black and her

assistant, I asked Alana to work with me and place them

into CSHD to fund it and she stated that she would talk with

the higher up’s and contact me back. She never made the

return call or followed up.


10) The SEC, Alana Black and Bill Hicks filed the

complaint against Conversion Solutions and myself alleging a

“pump and dump” scheme without even having obtained the

necessary trading records for FHAL or Conversion (CSHD). On

the same day that I gave them my deposition and furnished

them with other Rule 26 documentation, they admitted that

they had not subpoenaed or obtained the trading records but

promised that they would obtain them and furnish them to me

as soon as possible. I needed the trading records to prove my

innocence. I supplied the entire Market via Press releases

and public web site to include the Security Exchange

Commission via 8K with proof that the entire float of the

stock was dried up within the first two stock CUSIP number

changes associated with FHAL and CVSU (CSHD predecessor)

which would be proven by acquiring the trading records, which

they did not do.


11) The Plaintiff’s poor effort to prove the

allegation of “Pump and Dump” filed against the defendant via

the obtaining of trading records which is necessary to prove

the selling of illegal shares of the corporation is

evident through the plaintiffs own comment in the “Plaintiffs

brief to opposition” filed on the 16th day of November as

followed “There is uncertainty about how many shares of

Conversion’s shares are outstanding”.


12) By Alana Black admittance that they don’t know how

many shares of Conversion (CSHD) actually exist,

which the trading records would show, The Plaintiff either

has not obtained the trading records as promised or has

concealed them and those trading records will show that

Conversion Solutions (CSHD) and myself have a valid defense

to the Complaint that was filed.


13) This Court entered a consent order on November 7,

2006, allowing CSHD and myself to continue in business as

usual subject to certain restrictions, however, the Transfer

Agent, Atlanta SEC, Alana Black and Bill Hicks would not

release the EDGAR codes to me so we could continue normal

business without them and the Transfer Agent would not

recognize me as the CEO without the EDGAR Codes, further

harming the interests of the shareholders and violating the

disclosure requirements of Rule 26 F.R.C.P. Multiple

accesses to the filing codes were requested via telephone and

via the EDGAR filing site to obtain the codes prior to the

halt and thereafter.


14) The sealed envelope that I presented to and was

accepted by this Court included a trading/handling contract

with one of the largest bond traders which included

contracted bank accounts for the bonds. This accepted

evidence was one of the many evidentiary defenses to the

complaint filed by the Plaintiff (SEC).


15) The SEC, Alana Black and Bill Hicks have, at all

times material hereto, refused to provide me with any

discovery, including but not limited to the trading

information which will show who actually sold shares that did

not exist and who profited at the expense of the innocent

shareholders.


16) The failure to file an answer by Conversion

Solutions and myself was not due to excusable neglect or

inadvertence but was a result of the unethical and

inappropriate actions of the Plaintiff, Alana Black and Bill

Hicks in order to prevent me from obtaining the information

necessary to file an answer and defenses and they kept the

negotiations open until well after they obtained the

unauthorized default.


The following affirmations pertain to the Motion For

Default Judgment and supporting memorandum of law with Alana

Black’s mistaken version of the Factual Allegation, filed by

Alana Black in November 2007:


17) The allegations of the complaint are not true and

should not be accepted as true because the default entered by

the clerk was unauthorized and did not conform to Rule 55

F.R.C.P.


18) Factual allegation # 4:

None of the documents referred to in #4 overstated

Conversion,s assets. Everything contained on all reports

referred to therein were true and correct to my best

knowledge and belief at the time they were prepared.


19) Factual allegations #5 and #6:

None of the allegations referred to in #5 and #6 are false.

The September 26 Form 8-K that stated that “Conversion’s

Board of Directors has approved a contract extension with the

Caracas Group and accepted into its Asset Management

Portfolio an additional 5 Billion Euro denominated

Global Bonds on the Republic of Venezuela with an 11% annual

coupon.” Everything contained in or referred to therein were

true and correct to my best knowledge and belief at that

time.


20) Factual allegation # 9:

This allegation is being misstated. This is not what the

September 26 8-K says. The initial validation was for 700

million and the 5 billion was a contract extension. The Court

has these sealed documents in its possession to prove her

allegations false.


21) Factual allegations # 10-12:

The 5 billion was a contract extension that was taken into

the portfolio as previously stated. The authorization was for

up to 1.4 billion by the Venezuelan State Department, not 700

million, it was a best efforts offering. I even supplied

copies of the bar codes and a letter from the Ambassador.


22) Factual allegations # 13-16:

Alana’s facts are on “information and belief” which are

wrong, she doesn’t understand what she is reading. All

supporting evidence is in the sealed envelope in

the Courts possession and everything contained in or referred

to in the sealed envelope in evidence was true and correct to

my best knowledge and belief at that time.


23) Factual allegation # 18:

The bond was authorized up to 2 billion dollars. Our bond was

only 500 million of the original 2 billion authorized. Alana

is talking about something different. Everything contained in

or referred to in factual allegations #16 and #17 was

true and correct to my best knowledge and belief at that time.


continued below...
 
Posted by LT on :
 
24) Factual allegation # 19:

See answer to # 24 hereinabove.


25) Factual allegations #20-24:

These factual allegations appear to be accurate and contain

no allegation of any wrongdoing by Conversion or myself and

neither Conversion or myself sold any shares during the price

increase.


26) Factual allegations # 25-27:

Nothing fraudulent was ever released. Everything contained in

any release was true and correct to my best knowledge and

belief at the time of any release.


27) Factual allegations # 28-33:

These allegations by Alana Black are totally false,

inaccurate, self-serving and fraudulent. All filings, reports

and releases by Conversion Solutions and myself were honest,

accurate, correct and not misleading to my best knowledge and

belief at the time they were filed or reported.


28) Factual allegations # 34-35:

Alana’s statement is untrue; documents proving Conversion and

myself innocent, including the Euroclear printouts were

inside the sealed envelope accepted into evidence by the

Court.


Section C Violations.

29) Allegation of Fraud # 1:

There were no instances of fraud, misleading information,

misrepresentations or omissions on the part of Conversion

Solutions and/or myself. Nothing Alana Black alleges in # 1

is true as far as Conversion Solutions or myself is

concerned. Everything contained in any filings, reports or

releases was true and correct to my best knowledge and belief

at the time they were filed. I have proof and witnesses to

verify this fact.


30) Allegation of reporting violations # 2:

Alana Black’s allegations are false. My auditor was not an SEC

auditor so he submitted the reports to the SEC oversight

committee who approved and signed off on the reports in

question. To the best knowledge and belief of Conversion

Solutions and me, all reports were true and correct at the

time that they were filed.


31) Allegation # 3: Harris Aided and Abetted

Conversion’s Reporting Violations.

To the best knowledge and belief of Conversion Solutions and

me, all reports were true and correct at the time that they

were filed.


32) Allegation #4: Harris Falsely Certified Reports

No certified fraudulent financial statements ever existed or

were filed. To the best knowledge and belief of Conversion

Solutions and me, all certified financial statements were

true and correct at the time that they were filed. I am not a

CPA and would have no knowledge of any misstatements in

financial statements.


Allegation D: INJUNCTIVE RELIEF

33) Alana Black is attempting to allege self-serving

facts that do not apply to Conversion Solutions or to me.

There was no massive fraudulent scheme on the part of

Conversion Solutions or me. Everything contained in any

filings, reports or releases was true and correct to the best

knowledge and belief of Conversion Solutions and myself at

the time they were filed. I have proof and witnesses to

substantiate the truthfulness of every release, report and

filing.


Allegation E: HARRIS SHOULD BE BARRED FROM ACTING AS AN
OFFICER OR DIRECTOR IN THE FUTURE


34) This is an allegation that has no merit. This Court

entered an order allowing Conversion Solutions and me to

continue operating the Corporation as usual. Nothing has

transpired to change the reason for allowing me to continue

as before. The fact is that the Plaintiff (SEC) and the

Plaintiff’s attorneys have prevented Conversion Solutions and

me from doing any further business because they seized all

company records and will not grant me access to those

records.


Allegation F: CIVIL PENALTIES SHOULD BE IMPOSED

35) I have no knowledge of any misstatements,

omissions, fraud or any security violations committed

by me that would give rise to any civil penalties. The

only losses sustained by shareholders were caused by

the SEC and its attorneys when they filed a lawsuit

that is without merit and halted trading of the CSHD

stock and then allowed it to later continue trading

without enforcing any compliance with Rule 15c2-11 of the
General Rules and Regulations promulgated under the
Securities Exchange Act of 1934, this can be proved via
discovery. Alana Black prevented me from drawing down on the
bonds which would have funded the business. Alana Black is
responsible for any shareholder loss.

Allegation G: ADDITIONAL INFORMATION AND REQUEST FOR HEARING

36) Alana Black makes an erroneous statement that there
were fraudulent misrepresentations that caused shareholder
losses rather than her own unethical and fraudulent actions.
I also request a hearing to present witness testimony to show
that all filings, reports and releases were truthful and
accurate and that no fraud or misrepresentation was done by
Conversion Solutions or by me, as well as testimony to show
that any and all shareholder loss was due to the unethical
actions of the Plaintiff and especially attorneys Alana Black
and Bill Hicks.

37) Due to the refusal of the Plaintiff and its
attorneys to furnish any disclosure required by Rule 26
F.R.C.P., this Defendant needs additional time for preparing
and filing supplemental affidavits and documentation beyond
the originally requested January 2, 2008 date. The
enlargement needed is 30 days from the date that the
Plaintiff completes all discovery allowed under all Federal
Rules of Civil Procedure.


I, RUFUS PAUL HARRIS a/k/a PAUL RUFUS HARRIS, after

being duly sworn according to law, do state and affirm,

under penalty of perjury, that the facts set forth in

the foregoing SUPPLEMENTAL AFFIDAVIT IN SUPPORT OF MOTION

FOR RECONSIDERATION AND IN OPPOSITION TO PLAINTIFF’S MOTION

FOR DEFAULT JUDGMENT AND SUPPORTING MEMORANDUM OF LAW

are true and correct to my best knowledge and belief.


----------------------------------------------


Oh yeah everything was copied to the following;

United States Attorney General
U.S. Department of Justice
950 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW
Washington, DC 20530-0001


Office of the Attorney General
State of Georgia
40 Capitol Square, SW
Atlanta, GA 30334


There has also been another filing sudmitted and 2 more to follow!!!
 
Posted by LT on :
 
"Now if someone wants to write letters to the SEC now, just take the FACTS provided in the filing and see if you get a response to them!!!!

What you will get is another poor attempt to point everything at me as a “PLAN” to scheme!!!!

I am going to start a signature letter to go to a few selected individuals on the Hill, It will be posted on my site Gabreeders.com via PDF, WORD and works, if interested print it out, sign and fax it to the numbers provided!!!

It is now time to flood the fires with gasoline and end this illegal activity!!!!

Rufus Paul Harris

P.S. Yes the filing was received by the clerk but just has not made it to the Pacer system for some reason!!!! Where is that person that always called the clerk to see if anything has been received in the past!!! What hapen to you!!!"

 
Posted by LT on :
 
This, to me, is the most telling point in the filing...

"I was engaged in settlement talks with the attorneys

for the Plaintiff (SEC) prior to and after the default was

entered by the Clerk about settlement of the case. Alana

Black and Bill Hicks told me that if I agreed to return the

CSHD Convertible Note Holders money that they would drop

everything and dismiss the case. I responded by asking her to

provide me the violated regulation by and through issuing the

Convertible Notes. She never returned or discussed the issue

again."



Now it doesn't get any worse than this. They are wanting the convertible noteholders money returned!!! Not one damm word about the shareholders money. We see who they care about, and who they are protecting, and it sure as hell ain't us. Of course, we knew this.... it smells of bribery.
 
Posted by Igor R on :
 
Now if the filings arent on pacer, how did you get them?
 
Posted by milliam on :
 
RPH posted them on his site.
 
Posted by Stockstar69 on :
 
This actually looks very compelling! The statements made by Rufus make him sound like Perry Mason! If true, and I think that many of them are since some of the claims and presentations do make a lot of sense, this could drag on for years in the courts.

The saga continues.

Godspeed!
 
Posted by thesource on :
 
Once again with no legal counsel to represent CSHD , these documents are not worth the paper they were written on .

RPH cannot file motions in behalf of the company plain and simple ......
 
Posted by TimW on :
 
Lawyers are corrupt, I think he wants to go as far as he can alone. Plus they always want a HUGE piece of the pie..

And thats the shareholders pie [Smile]

[Big Grin]

Its america, its apple pie, and its made with GOLDEN delicious! Rufus for president!

^lol
Darn i think i should go get some koolaid for lunch.
 
Posted by Mr. CATIAEngineer on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by thesource:
No but he could very well be picked up at court if he's got a bench warrant from the failure to appear on his last DUI court setting . I would also bet they are going to MTR (motion to revoke) his current probation since he's received another DUI charge .

None of this has anything to do with the SEC case , I just thought it was funny where it said "HABITUAL VIOLATOR" . That sounds like Dufus to me ........

You are seriously reaching now........

So, did you get that Pacer account like I suggested some time ago? Theres a new filing to check out.

edit : never mind I see LT helped out. Thanks LT [Smile]
 
Posted by Igor R on :
 
I thought there was another one after the 2 she posted?
 
Posted by Stockstar69 on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by TimW:
Lawyers are corrupt, I think he wants to go as far as he can alone. Plus they always want a HUGE piece of the pie..

And thats the shareholders pie [Smile]

[Big Grin]

Its america, its apple pie, and its made with GOLDEN delicious! Rufus for president!

^lol
Darn i think i should go get some koolaid for lunch.

Well, he could use the excuse that since the SEC is holding the the company assets and/or bond he has no funds to hire a lawyer?? [Big Grin]
 
Posted by Igor R on :
 
Well the SEC didn't allow him to draw down on the bonds, so yea wheres he going to get funds for a lawyer from?
 
Posted by TimW on :
 
tis true tis true
 
Posted by thesource on :
 
Thats his problem . When the IRS comes in and seizes accounts from businesses , the fact that they are cash broke so they cannot hire legal counsel does not fly in court . Its just like ignorance of the law is not an defense either .
 
Posted by Igor R on :
 
So how else is rufus going to get legal counsel without funds? Going to give them magic fairy dust?
 
Posted by Ocqueoc on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by Mr. CATIAEngineer:
quote:
Originally posted by thesource:
No but he could very well be picked up at court if he's got a bench warrant from the failure to appear on his last DUI court setting . I would also bet they are going to MTR (motion to revoke) his current probation since he's received another DUI charge .

None of this has anything to do with the SEC case , I just thought it was funny where it said "HABITUAL VIOLATOR" . That sounds like Dufus to me ........

You are seriously reaching now........

So, did you get that Pacer account like I suggested some time ago? Theres a new filing to check out.

edit : never mind I see LT helped out. Thanks LT [Smile]

IMO
please do not waste anymore time responding to him.If EVERYONE ignores him, maybe he will go away.I doubt it because he seems to like to argue.He has stated he has no shares, no interest blah , blah, so let him go to a board of one of the other places that he was pumping awhile back.He can no longer say that he is "protecting" other people from buying in.If the SEC had requested RPH's request to kept this on halt, than we would all be in a better place.

Have a great day!
 
Posted by thesource on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by Igor R:
So how else is rufus going to get legal counsel without funds? Going to give them magic fairy dust?

Once again thats not the SEC's or the Judges problem , its the companies problem . How do you think the IRS , state comptrollers offices in every state , the DEA and the EPA end up with so much seized property ? When they come in , they seize everything they can get their hands on . You have to fight for it to stand a chance on getting it all or even a part of it back . If you cannot fight or in this case afford to hire a lawyer to fight for you , tough crap .
 
Posted by thesource on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by Ocqueoc:
quote:
Originally posted by Mr. CATIAEngineer:
quote:
Originally posted by thesource:
No but he could very well be picked up at court if he's got a bench warrant from the failure to appear on his last DUI court setting . I would also bet they are going to MTR (motion to revoke) his current probation since he's received another DUI charge .

None of this has anything to do with the SEC case , I just thought it was funny where it said "HABITUAL VIOLATOR" . That sounds like Dufus to me ........

You are seriously reaching now........

So, did you get that Pacer account like I suggested some time ago? Theres a new filing to check out.

edit : never mind I see LT helped out. Thanks LT [Smile]

IMO
please do not waste anymore time responding to him.If EVERYONE ignores him, maybe he will go away.I doubt it because he seems to like to argue.He has stated he has no shares, no interest blah , blah, so let him go to a board of one of the other places that he was pumping awhile back.He can no longer say that he is "protecting" other people from buying in.If the SEC had requested RPH's request to kept this on halt, than we would all be in a better place.

Have a great day!

Whats amazing is that you guys conitnue to bash me about stating the law but if this were reversed and Rufus some how by the grace of God caught a break and the stock took off like a rocket ship , the thread would go 10 times the lenght it is and half of the post would be about how stupid thesource was all along .......
 
Posted by Igor R on :
 
How can you fight for it if the SEC froze your assets, or prevented you from being able to continue business to get assets.
 
Posted by Mr. CATIAEngineer on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by thesource:
Thats his problem . When the IRS comes in and seizes accounts from businesses , the fact that they are cash broke so they cannot hire legal counsel does not fly in court . Its just like ignorance of the law is not an defense either .

Your game here is OVER unless you are filing your own suit against whomever twisted your arm into spending money you obviously could not afford to trade. NO ONE here even likes you because you are rude and offensive yet you stick around like a crazy uncle left off a party guest list. You are not "helping" anyone....we are obviously not selling at this point.

Get the point for F sake......we REALLY dont care what you think.
 
Posted by Mr. CATIAEngineer on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by thesource:
quote:
Originally posted by Igor R:
So how else is rufus going to get legal counsel without funds? Going to give them magic fairy dust?

Once again thats not the SEC's or the Judges problem , its the companies problem . How do you think the IRS , state comptrollers offices in every state , the DEA and the EPA end up with so much seized property ? When they come in , they seize everything they can get their hands on . You have to fight for it to stand a chance on getting it all or even a part of it back . If you cannot fight or in this case afford to hire a lawyer to fight for you , tough crap .
And who's problem is it that you lost your a$$ in this stock? Thats YOUR problem....a problem you obviously cant get over. Get a therapist and work through it.
 
Posted by thesource on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by Igor R:
How can you fight for it if the SEC froze your assets, or prevented you from being able to continue business to get assets.

You people just fail to comprehend the words I am saying . Do yourselves a huge favor . Stop the DD on this worthless azz company and its CEO . Take some time to research civil law and its procedures . Its like reading the Bible . Nothing bad can happen from it . You will be a smarter person for it even if you do not personally believe its right .

And for the record , I could care less what you people sell at or if you sell at all . As I've said before , Rufus has done way more damage to this stock than any basher or short seller could have ever done .
 
Posted by thesource on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by Mr. CATIAEngineer:
quote:
Originally posted by thesource:
Thats his problem . When the IRS comes in and seizes accounts from businesses , the fact that they are cash broke so they cannot hire legal counsel does not fly in court . Its just like ignorance of the law is not an defense either .

Your game here is OVER unless you are filing your own suit against whomever twisted your arm into spending money you obviously could not afford to trade. NO ONE here even likes you because you are rude and offensive yet you stick around like a crazy uncle left off a party guest list. You are not "helping" anyone....we are obviously not selling at this point.

Get the point for F sake......we REALLY dont care what you think.

My game along with every one elses game was over when this was halted . Some just took a lighter loss than others . At this point , hell you might as well hold on to it unless you need the tax write off from other profits you made this year in the stock market which I highly doubt most of you will have that problem .
 
Posted by LT on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by Mr. CATIAEngineer:
quote:
Originally posted by thesource:
Thats his problem . When the IRS comes in and seizes accounts from businesses , the fact that they are cash broke so they cannot hire legal counsel does not fly in court . Its just like ignorance of the law is not an defense either .

Your game here is OVER unless you are filing your own suit against whomever twisted your arm into spending money you obviously could not afford to trade. NO ONE here even likes you because you are rude and offensive yet you stick around like a crazy uncle left off a party guest list. You are not "helping" anyone....we are obviously not selling at this point.

Get the point for F sake......we REALLY dont care what you think.

[Big Grin] [Big Grin] [Big Grin] [Big Grin]
 
Posted by Mr. CATIAEngineer on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by thesource:
quote:
Originally posted by Mr. CATIAEngineer:
quote:
Originally posted by thesource:
Thats his problem . When the IRS comes in and seizes accounts from businesses , the fact that they are cash broke so they cannot hire legal counsel does not fly in court . Its just like ignorance of the law is not an defense either .

Your game here is OVER unless you are filing your own suit against whomever twisted your arm into spending money you obviously could not afford to trade. NO ONE here even likes you because you are rude and offensive yet you stick around like a crazy uncle left off a party guest list. You are not "helping" anyone....we are obviously not selling at this point.

Get the point for F sake......we REALLY dont care what you think.

My game along with every one elses game was over when this was halted . Some just took a lighter loss than others . At this point , hell you might as well hold on to it unless you need the tax write off from other profits you made this year in the stock market which I highly doubt most of you will have that problem .
I havent lost a penny on CSHD, im still in the game. As you just admitted, the game has been over for you for quite some time now. Im sorry you cant find peace in that. Good luck to you....im finished with this banter
 
Posted by thesource on :
 
I've found peace in making a damn good amount of profit on other plays . Believe me that I sleep plenty good at night but would love to see Dufus behind bars and the investors get back atleast a portion of their money back but there's a better chance of it snowing in South Texas on Christmas day .
 
Posted by LT on :
 
Mr. CATIAEngineer has it right.....the DD will continue because thesource has no clue as to what is really going on here.... and soon he will find out how wrong he really is....and then the pain of being wrong as well as the pain from selling so cheap will hurt very bad.....
 
Posted by thesource on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by LT:
Mr. CATIAEngineer has it right.....the DD will continue because thesource has no clue as to what is really going on here.... and soon he will find out how wrong he really is....and then the pain of being wrong as well as the pain from selling so cheap will hurt very bad.....

LMMFAO ..... I guess thats just a chance I am willing to take . Promise me one thing though , when it happens , can I be invited to the CSHD BBQ II ? You can all laugh and make fun of me in person that way .
 
Posted by TimW on :
 
We'll even pay your airfare.
 
Posted by thesource on :
 
You gotta a deal my friend . I'll send you my address after this thing blast off . In fact I will get my bags packed just in case .
 
Posted by LT on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by thesource:
quote:
Originally posted by LT:
Mr. CATIAEngineer has it right.....the DD will continue because thesource has no clue as to what is really going on here.... and soon he will find out how wrong he really is....and then the pain of being wrong as well as the pain from selling so cheap will hurt very bad.....

LMMFAO ..... I guess thats just a chance I am willing to take . Promise me one thing though , when it happens , can I be invited to the CSHD BBQ II ? You can all laugh and make fun of me in person that way .
source just to show you what kind of person i am and how sure i am about things , i will personally meet you there and have the 1st drink with you and no laughing will be done...we will have a few drinks enjoy the evening with good people ....then watch as you go up to RPH and say "you were right" .... [Big Grin]
 
Posted by LT on :
 
source make sure your passport is in good order also....
 
Posted by thesource on :
 
LT , when that day comes , I will do what ever is required for the CSHD club to forgive me for all my sins against their Lord Rufus and his band of merry morons .

Until then , I'll just keep bashing his ignorance and your loyalty to him .
 
Posted by glassman on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by thesource:
quote:
Originally posted by Igor R:
How can you fight for it if the SEC froze your assets, or prevented you from being able to continue business to get assets.

You people just fail to comprehend the words I am saying . Do yourselves a huge favor . Stop the DD on this worthless azz company and its CEO . Take some time to research civil law and its procedures . Its like reading the Bible . Nothing bad can happen from it . You will be a smarter person for it even if you do not personally believe its right .

And for the record , I could care less what you people sell at or if you sell at all . As I've said before , Rufus has done way more damage to this stock than any basher or short seller could have ever done .

stop the DD?

that's crazy.

Do yourselves a huge favor you should post elsewhere and focus on your own money.

if you just wanna trade insults? you are welcome to come over to the off-topics. we have made a sport of it. somehow i think you might be at a disadvantage tho.
 
Posted by Ocqueoc on :
 
Glassman,
Have I ever told you how much I love that you post on here?
It is a breath of fresh air to read your posts!

P.S. Do you have a ban button? Just kidding or am I? LOL
 
Posted by glassman on :
 
Achilles was arguably the greatest warrior of all time.

He defeated Hector of "invincible" Troy at the city gates and proceeded to drag Hectors dead body around the battle for as many 9 days, depending on which story you read. The Gods did not smile on this. The greatest warrior of all time was killed shortly thereafter by an arrow in the foot or knife in the back (depending on which story you read) by Hectors wimpy little bro.... Karma is tuffstuff. Achilles was on the "winning team", but he was still a loser.
 
Posted by fhalyesss on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by thesource:
LT , when that day comes , I will do what ever is required for the CSHD club to forgive me for all my sins against their Lord Rufus and his band of merry morons .

Until then , I'll just keep bashing his ignorance and your loyalty to him .

LOL
Source

Remind me of your join date again!!!
NUFF SAID!!!!

[Eek!] [Eek!] [Eek!] [Eek!]
 
Posted by thesource on :
 
My join date was about a month after I got into this crap hole . I was banned from HSM for questioning TUT and Rufus at the time . I stumbled on to this site and thought it to be more neutral territory but have since realized that the brain washing has been done on a very large scale and alot of people are still under the influence of CSHD .
 
Posted by glassman on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by thesource:
My join date was about a month after I got into this crap hole . I was banned from HSM for questioning TUT and Rufus at the time . I stumbled on to this site and thought it to be more neutral territory but have since realized that the brain washing has been done on a very large scale and alot of people are still under the influence of CSHD .

LOL...

it was much more neutral, and it will stay that way if possible. it will also remain polite. agreeing to disagree is how adults play.
 
Posted by thesource on :
 
I'd say the majority of the site is pretty neutral but for some reason this particular stock is just one of those topics that people refuse to see things for how they are . I have nothing against a single person on here . I know you want to believe that by some miracle things will turn around and everyone will be swimming naked in their fortunes but given the track record of this company and its fairy tale CEO , its not looking to good .

I will be so glad when RPH is sitting in jail whether its from this mess or from the DUI case . He really needs to be locked up for the good of every person in this mess regardless of the side you are on . I would also like to see the others get punished as well but they are running for cover hoping the feds will forget about them . I am sure old Ben is up to his neck in it just as much as RPH since they are running buddies .
 
Posted by glassman on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by thesource:


I will be so glad when RPH is sitting in jail whether its from this mess or from the DUI case . He really needs to be locked up for the good of every person in this mess regardless of the side you are on . I would also like to see the others get punished as well but they are running for cover hoping the feds will forget about them . I am sure old Ben is up to his neck in it just as much as RPH since they are running buddies .

you see? you and i agree on aloto fthings.

telling people to go away and shutup only facilitates the scammers. aslong as people keep posting the stuff? the issue is still alive, and the Feds can't just walk away...

i can tell you for fact that there's people involved that would like this thread to go away...

i've said this before and i'll say it again, leaving this up front and center gives newbies some point of reference.

all penny players get burned, it's part of the game. if this one bothers you then don't open the thread.

IMO, it's not the message you have to share that's a problem it's simply the style...
 
Posted by a surfer on :
 
Interesting events today...

Now these are on pacer correct...????

Not just pro boards.
 
Posted by TimW on :
 
Got three docs on pacer.

Motion to Compel
Affidavit in Support of Motion
Response in Opposition to Motion


Rufus on the offense now.. Crazy.
 
Posted by a surfer on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by TimW:
Got three docs on pacer.

Motion to Compel
Affidavit in Support of Motion
Response in Opposition to Motion


Rufus on the offense now.. Crazy.

Good

What kills me is the obvious effort this guy has put into this.


You would think funding the companies and getting the ball rolling that way would have been easier and less stressfull than trying to haul over the system.

More power to him.
 
Posted by thesource on :
 
If he'd only put forth 10% of this effort a year ago with legal counsel , the stock might have actually stood a small chance but at this point , he's just spinning his wheels and running his mouth .
 
Posted by thesource on :
 
I just read the filings on PACER . While they might seem impressive to someone who does not know what they are looking at , its just more fluff from Rufus . He's still trying to file motions on behalf of the company through himself and thats not going to work not to mention its been a year since the suit was filed . I highly doubt the judge is going to grant him a damn thing after all this time even if they had legal counsel but they don't so its not even an option right now .
 
Posted by TimW on :
 
Are you trying to convince us or yourself?
 
Posted by wallymac on :
 
thesource:

A couple of points here. First, this site has always been neutral. Very few post here in comparison to it's hey day. Therefore when you state that a lot of people are under the influence of CSHD, I'd say you are dead wrong. With the exception of newcomer LT, the majority here have questioned over and over the events that transpired.

Just because most here are civil and not attempting to win others over to their point of view but instead discuss and learn by this experience does not mean they are under the influence.

It simply means that MOST here are continuing to look for the truth as to what happened. Was Rufus a pawn or a willing participant? Was it MA. DP and Corey that orchestrated the rise and fall? What role did Sabra play? I mean these are all legit questions.

The only one I have read that feels we(CSHD) are golden is LT, as is her right. Even though I disagree with her, it is not my place to demean her or make her convert to my point of view.

I also believe the court case is over by reason of default BUTnot being an attorney can not be certain. If I remember correctly you are not an attorney either. So let's let the professionals handle it.

Post your position over and over is not convincing anyone, nor should it.

Those here that currently own shares paid the price of admission and have the right to see it through to the end.

I have not read one person who has advocated buying shares and therefore whatever is being discussed hurts no one.

I've lost money on plenty of penny stocks and have stuck around on some that were scams but I posted because there were people posting in an effort to attract new investors. There was a reason to alert the newbies. Here there is none.

It's all about discussion. Heck I know I have learned many things in the past year through postings of many individuals on this thread. I hope to continue to expand my base of knowledge by checking in and hopefully finding more pearl's of wisdom.

GLTA
Wally
 
Posted by Igor R on :
 
Is there a post anywhere that contains the third filing? Ive read the two LT posted, but haven't seen the third.
 
Posted by RyanPBF on :
 
source you were a shareholder before that october 26th date correct? So if for some reason this thing did come back you should still be entitled to six times your original shares. Correct?
 
Posted by TimW on :
 
6 times the share count wont be much help at .005 per share !

By Rufie's standard, he "should" be entitled to it though.
 
Posted by thesource on :
 
Yeah I should be entitled to 3300 X 6 shares of a stock that will more than likely go for years as a shell . Hey , if the stock is free , I'll take it but am not paying a single penny for it .
 
Posted by Mr. CATIAEngineer on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by thesource:
Yeah I should be entitled to 3300 X 6 shares of a stock that will more than likely go for years as a shell . Hey , if the stock is free , I'll take it but am not paying a single penny for it .

You have already made up your mind how you are planning to handle your 6:1. You are allllmost cultish. The best part is, if the man you doubt with all that anger and resentment turns out to be all you say hes not...you get the shares regardless of how you feel. How nice.....neat
 
Posted by TimW on :
 
If you want source, i got 6,500 shares ill cut you a deal at 13.50. / share... leaves room for you to profit 10% when its reset/cashed out at $15/share.. rofl.
 
Posted by Ocqueoc on :
 
Wally,
Nice post!
 
Posted by thedoctor on :
 
Hi Everyone .... I just stopped by to say hi and to wish all of you the very "Happiest Holidays". You are all an incredible group of people who deserved much more than you receieved from being owners of CSHD stock. I hope all of you get your "just" rewards in the coming year. To all of you I send my "love" and prayers.
 
Posted by glassman on :
 
hey doc, right back atcha
 
Posted by fhalyesss on :
 
From RPH Board:

Rufus Paul Harris
Administrator
*********
member is offline


To those that have inquired, Yes I have also heard the same rumor!!!

The Rumor is that 3 people have been arrested for the short selling of CSHD and that their assets have been seized!!! Also that there is a class action suit being prepared by a group in TX against the people that have been arrested!!!

I have no actual documentation of this but have heard the same!!! If I receive the documentation I will post it here as I did with the Paul Poetter stuff!!!!


[Eek!] [Eek!] [Eek!] [Eek!]
 
Posted by LT on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by fhalyesss:
From RPH Board:

Rufus Paul Harris
Administrator
*********
member is offline


To those that have inquired, Yes I have also heard the same rumor!!!

The Rumor is that 3 people have been arrested for the short selling of CSHD and that their assets have been seized!!! Also that there is a class action suit being prepared by a group in TX against the people that have been arrested!!!

I have no actual documentation of this but have heard the same!!! If I receive the documentation I will post it here as I did with the Paul Poetter stuff!!!!


[Eek!] [Eek!] [Eek!] [Eek!]

Today at 12:44am » Rufus Paul Harris wrote:


really tired of the lies that these people try to sell everyone, and there dumbutt cronies that use HSM to try and choke out the truth!!!


Everyone knows that the only tradable shares in the market was 31 million, I placed it on the web site via the DTCC security report, the TA’s records and the ADP report!!! But they will tell the same lie over and over even with the FACTS there for all to see!!! I guess the thing that I have trouble believing is that some people believe them even with the FACTS slapping them in the face!!!!

To the perpetrators; you can lie and spin the truth all that you want but this time you did it to the wrong company with the right CEO at the front!!!! As this slowly moves forward you and your activities will be exposed, I will see to this!!!! This is why you are working so hard and this makes me very happy!!! The harder you work the lies the happier I am, because I know the pressure must be extreme for you!!!

Shortly I will post the DTCC reports, the TA’s records and all of the ADP reports on the web site to help show just how far you will go in you lies!!!! The only reason that they are not already there is because I do not have that information on this computer!!! But I will have it there shortly for the world to see!!!


. [Big Grin]
 
Posted by Stockstar69 on :
 
Hmmm, interesting!

I don't think we are "golden", but we may slooowly be starting to turn into something other than a chunk of coal.
 
Posted by PCola77 on :
 
I know most of you bought long ago, and like I see thesource had like 3500 shares and Tim has 6500 shares. Is that about typical? I bought some a few months ago and now have 70,000 shares tha I paid like $700 for. If I have more than most of you, and this somehow does end up trading at any substantial amount someday, how is it fair that I would make a ton more money than any of you?

Even if everything is going according to Rufus' "plan", you all got caught in the crosshairs for no good reason, and he really did screw a lot of you, regardless of how it ends up.
 
Posted by RyanPBF on :
 
Well I just recently sold my 20k shares for a tax write off, but if something ever comes out of this I'll still have 120k shares from that 6 for 1 although I'm not holding my breath.
 
Posted by PCola77 on :
 
I'm reposting this just because a new page was just started, so people see what Ryan was replying to and in case anyone else feels like responding.

I know most of you bought long ago, and like I see thesource had like 3500 shares and Tim has 6500 shares. Is that about typical? I bought some a few months ago and now have 70,000 shares tha I paid like $700 for. If I have more than most of you, and this somehow does end up trading at any substantial amount someday, how is it fair that I would make a ton more money than any of you?

Even if everything is going according to Rufus' "plan", you all got caught in the crosshairs for no good reason, and he really did screw a lot of you, regardless of how it ends up.
 
Posted by Stockstar69 on :
 
Full Disclosure...LOL. I have 10,000 shares.
 
Posted by LT on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by PCola77:
I'm reposting this just because a new page was just started, so people see what Ryan was replying to and in case anyone else feels like responding.

I know most of you bought long ago, and like I see thesource had like 3500 shares and Tim has 6500 shares. Is that about typical? I bought some a few months ago and now have 70,000 shares tha I paid like $700 for. If I have more than most of you, and this somehow does end up trading at any substantial amount someday, how is it fair that I would make a ton more money than any of you?

Even if everything is going according to Rufus' "plan", you all got caught in the crosshairs for no good reason, and he really did screw a lot of you, regardless of how it ends up.

this is the main reason RPH asked the judge to Halt trading from the very begining , so this would not happen ... the 6:1 will most likely be a Prefered share and be worth alot more and also come with some restrictions on them ....IMO
 
Posted by TimW on :
 
LoL I think thats what the whole before oct xx date was about..

Those before that day get whatever he pulls out of his hat, or his overalls.

Those that bought after, dont.

Who knows.
 
Posted by Mr. CATIAEngineer on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by TimW:
LoL I think thats what the whole before oct xx date was about..

Those before that day get whatever he pulls out of his hat, or his overalls.

Those that bought after, dont.

Who knows.

It was a lame point anyway, he has no idea what i paid for my shares.
 
Posted by Homersbud on :
 
What is this thread even about? CSHD is done and this new CEO that came on board last year is almost as big of a joke as Ruffus was.
 
Posted by Mr. CATIAEngineer on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by Homersbud:
What is this thread even about? CSHD is done and this new CEO that came on board last year is almost as big of a joke as Ruffus was.

Thank you for your time. Thats some very good, and incredibly unique, stuff you have to say.
 
Posted by Homersbud on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by Mr. CATIAEngineer:
quote:
Originally posted by Homersbud:
What is this thread even about? CSHD is done and this new CEO that came on board last year is almost as big of a joke as Ruffus was.

Thank you for your time. Thats some very good, and incredibly unique, stuff you have to say.
lol, thanks man. I really apperciate your thoughts [Smile]

BTW, I know you're being sarcastic!!
 
Posted by Mr. CATIAEngineer on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by Homersbud:
quote:
Originally posted by Mr. CATIAEngineer:
quote:
Originally posted by Homersbud:
What is this thread even about? CSHD is done and this new CEO that came on board last year is almost as big of a joke as Ruffus was.

Thank you for your time. Thats some very good, and incredibly unique, stuff you have to say.
lol, thanks man. I really apperciate your thoughts [Smile]

BTW, I know you're being sarcastic!!

No way....you caught onto that? [Wink]
 
Posted by thesource on :
 
Well to all that hold , good luck with that . I sold off mine and took a good azz kicking on it . I am a better and smarter trader for it . As said before , if I get some worthless shares down the road , so be it but I am not even paying a commission charge for them . I won't post any more until new news or filings hit pacer .
 
Posted by Mr. CATIAEngineer on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by thesource:
Well to all that hold , good luck with that . I sold off mine and took a good azz kicking on it . I am a better and smarter trader for it . As said before , if I get some worthless shares down the road , so be it but I am not even paying a commission charge for them . I won't post any more until new news or filings hit pacer .

 -


Just a little fun [Razz]

Check back every now and then juuuust in case.
 
Posted by Mr. CATIAEngineer on :
 
 -
 
Posted by PCola77 on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by LT:
quote:
Originally posted by PCola77:
I'm reposting this just because a new page was just started, so people see what Ryan was replying to and in case anyone else feels like responding.

I know most of you bought long ago, and like I see thesource had like 3500 shares and Tim has 6500 shares. Is that about typical? I bought some a few months ago and now have 70,000 shares tha I paid like $700 for. If I have more than most of you, and this somehow does end up trading at any substantial amount someday, how is it fair that I would make a ton more money than any of you?

Even if everything is going according to Rufus' "plan", you all got caught in the crosshairs for no good reason, and he really did screw a lot of you, regardless of how it ends up.

this is the main reason RPH asked the judge to Halt trading from the very begining , so this would not happen ... the 6:1 will most likely be a Prefered share and be worth alot more and also come with some restrictions on them ....IMO
LOL. I'd be interested in seeing how something like that would work...

First of all, unless you're saying the 6 "preferred shares" were convertable to a lot more than 6 common shares, then how could they be "worth more", and if the 6 "preferred shares" are worth more than 6 commons shares, say 60 common shares, why wouldn't he have said "60 to 1 dividend", wouldn't that have sounded better? [Roll Eyes]

And let's assume that there's some other thing that the "6" equates with. If a hundred people all got something that was "worth a lot more" and were all able to sell on the same day, after having their money tied up for like 18 months, what do you think would happen to the price of that thing? You think it holds it's value, or do you think it drops like a freaking rock?
 
Posted by TimW on :
 
Good points.

Maybe this is also why he wanted paper certs- exchange/redeem directly with company ?
 
Posted by T e x on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by LT:
quote:
Originally posted by PCola77:
I'm reposting this just because a new page was just started, so people see what Ryan was replying to and in case anyone else feels like responding.

I know most of you bought long ago, and like I see thesource had like 3500 shares and Tim has 6500 shares. Is that about typical? I bought some a few months ago and now have 70,000 shares tha I paid like $700 for. If I have more than most of you, and this somehow does end up trading at any substantial amount someday, how is it fair that I would make a ton more money than any of you?

Even if everything is going according to Rufus' "plan", you all got caught in the crosshairs for no good reason, and he really did screw a lot of you, regardless of how it ends up.

this is the main reason RPH asked the judge to Halt trading from the very begining , so this would not happen ... the 6:1 will most likely be a Prefered share and be worth alot more and also come with some restrictions on them ....IMO
More *puff & buff*... The SEC can suspend, and FINRA can halt, but that's it. Harris should've been responding in a proper manner, rather than wasting time...

There is no 6:1--nothing was ever filed, and it can't be back-dated...
 
Posted by PCola77 on :
 
Tex, I cringe to say this, because it's sure to open a can of worms, but I am *pretty sure* that's not true. If I think of it later I'll check some threads, but I think HVLN somehow back dated a stock-dividend. In fact, I got restricted shares of it in my account months after I sold, because I had some on the date they went with. I *thought*, but could be wrong, that it was a similar situation, in that they announced it but never filed anything, but then got it to happen like 6 months later.

Regardless, my point is you can't make something valuable just by saying it's valuable. As long as a million people stand at the ready to sell whatever they get for whatever they can get for it, it's NOT worth what peopel will say it's worth, on the exceptionally small chance that they do get the "6 to 1"...
 
Posted by T e x on :
 
ya, check it out...

There's a few cases (2 to 4, I'd say) I know of (out of 1000s and 1000s) in which the dailylist has been circumvented. For example, GVRP r/m'd to MAMG with only a PR, and to my knowledge, has *never* appeared on the dl... However, the regs do say something to the effect that a given class of shareholders must be treated equally. That is, you couldn't, say, award f/s shares to NOBO holders only, or only to clients of certain brokerages. And the procedure is notify NASD-now-FINRA, who sets the ex-date. Now, with restricted stock, you'll often see no ex-date, in which case the record date "becomes" the ex-date. So maybe there's some "odd-duck" other loophole with restricted--they're usually worthless, anyway...

But post whatever you find, and we can look into it...
 
Posted by Ocqueoc on :
 
Merry Christmas!!!

Happy New year!!!

Happy Holidays!!!
 
Posted by NEL on :
 
I have 25,000 shares that I paid alot more than .0010 for. I'm holding cause the $25.00 their worth is not worth selling for. I could take tax loss for a couple of years on this one.

HAPPY NEW YEAR TO ALL!
 
Posted by LT on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by NEL:
I have 25,000 shares that I paid alot more than .0010 for. I'm holding cause the $25.00 their worth is not worth selling for. I could take tax loss for a couple of years on this one.

HAPPY NEW YEAR TO ALL!

 -

[Big Grin]
 
Posted by LT on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by TimW:
Good points.

Maybe this is also why he wanted paper certs- exchange/redeem directly with company ?

 -
 
Posted by NEL on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by LT:
quote:
Originally posted by NEL:
I have 25,000 shares that I paid alot more than .0010 for. I'm holding cause the $25.00 their worth is not worth selling for. I could take tax loss for a couple of years on this one.

HAPPY NEW YEAR TO ALL!

 -

[Big Grin]

No certs, mine are held by Fidelity, not sure how to even go about getting certs. Any input.
 
Posted by LT on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by NEL:
quote:
Originally posted by LT:
quote:
Originally posted by NEL:
I have 25,000 shares that I paid alot more than .0010 for. I'm holding cause the $25.00 their worth is not worth selling for. I could take tax loss for a couple of years on this one.

HAPPY NEW YEAR TO ALL!

 -

[Big Grin]

No certs, mine are held by Fidelity, not sure how to even go about getting certs. Any input.
call your broker and ask for a certificate in your name and mailed to you....takes about 2 to 3 weeks.

the reason for a HCC, ( hard copy certificate ) is a certificate exchange that will happen in the near future... [Wink]
 
Posted by Igor R on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by LT:
quote:
Originally posted by NEL:
quote:
Originally posted by LT:
quote:
Originally posted by NEL:
I have 25,000 shares that I paid alot more than .0010 for. I'm holding cause the $25.00 their worth is not worth selling for. I could take tax loss for a couple of years on this one.

HAPPY NEW YEAR TO ALL!

 -

[Big Grin]

No certs, mine are held by Fidelity, not sure how to even go about getting certs. Any input.
call your broker and ask for a certificate in your name and mailed to you....takes about 2 to 3 weeks.

the reason for a HCC, ( hard copy certificate ) is a certificate exchange that will happen in the near future... [Wink]

Thats been supposed to happen in the near future for how many months now?
 
Posted by TimW on :
 
^ Word... I believe it was supposed to be october 2006.
 
Posted by T e x on :
 
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uW3nPqPPBDw
 
Posted by PCola77 on :
 
LT, I know this has been discussed a million times, but you don't seem to believe it or care. Why do you think that "hard copy certs" would/could be handled differently than electronic ones? I am pretty sure that it's a documented SEC or NASD rule that they may NOT be treated differently.

Why do you think that hard copies will/can be treated differently. I hope that you have more to back that position than "Rufus said so".
 
Posted by Lauralai on :
 
Would this count as an example, or am I as confused as always?

--------------------------------
*Mag*
Member


Member Rated:
posted 24 December, 2007 19:42
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
RZRR
Razor Resources Inc. Common Stock
RZOR
Razor Resources Inc. New Common Stock
15-1 F/S; Payable upon Surrender of Certificates
 
Posted by PCola77 on :
 
No, if you hold shares electronically, the broker takes care of the exchange, even if they've never had paper certs for you.
 
Posted by LT on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by PCola77:
LT, I know this has been discussed a million times, but you don't seem to believe it or care. Why do you think that "hard copy certs" would/could be handled differently than electronic ones? I am pretty sure that it's a documented SEC or NASD rule that they may NOT be treated differently.

Why do you think that hard copies will/can be treated differently. I hope that you have more to back that position than "Rufus said so".

ALL shares will be delt with ..the HCC's just are the fastest way to exchange and a for sure way .... electronic shares are not in your name they are in street name...and anything could happen to them , its up to your broker.... a HCC or hard copy certificate is in your name and taken out of circulation.
 
Posted by LT on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by PCola77:
No, if you hold shares electronically, the broker takes care of the exchange, even if they've never had paper certs for you.

wrong..... the reason RPH said from the very begining to get Hard Copy certs was he knew the float was bought up and the MM's were trading AIR Shares....thats the reason for HCC's...and when we go back to trading on a Bigger market it wont be thru your broker or any broker for that matter...this company is about to do something that has never been done before.... this will be a short elimination.... very soon you will be giving your HCC's to a new in-house Transfer Agent , which will deposit your shares into your very own acct. with the company...there you will be able to log on thru the new corp. web site and see your acct..... real time financials , L2's ,etc... you will be able to set your price in the market for shorty to buy shares from you.... ohh yes there will be a Short Squeeze....since all trading goes thru the company's in-house T/A , DTC Agent, theres no Illegal trading...
 
Posted by T e x on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by LT:
quote:
Originally posted by PCola77:
No, if you hold shares electronically, the broker takes care of the exchange, even if they've never had paper certs for you.

wrong..... the reason RPH said from the very begining to get Hard Copy certs was he knew the float was bought up and the MM's were trading AIR Shares....thats the reason for HCC's...and when we go back to trading on a Bigger market it wont be thru your broker or any broker for that matter...this company is about to do something that has never been done before.... this will be a short elimination.... very soon you will be giving your HCC's to a new in-house Transfer Agent , which will deposit your shares into your very own acct. with the company...there you will be able to log on thru the new corp. web site and see your acct..... real time financials , L2's ,etc... you will be able to set your price in the market for shorty to buy shares from you.... ohh yes there will be a Short Squeeze....since all trading goes thru the company's in-house T/A , DTC Agent, theres no Illegal trading...
total, unequivocated bull****...

Did you miss PCola's qualifiers?
 
Posted by LT on :
 
IMO this is what's coming in our near future.....

court case dropped ( SEC amended Filing ), trading halt granted, new company filings & PR's , HCC EXCHANGE with new in-house T/A, new trading platform Oracle based, trading on exchanges world wide, you as a shareholder can sell or buy with the company without any worry of your money being funneled into the crooks pockets...name your price....squeeze begins...ba bye shorty....all IMO...

 
Posted by TimW on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by PCola77:
No, if you hold shares electronically, the broker takes care of the exchange, even if they've never had paper certs for you.

Unfortunately electronic shares are not FDIC insured and may lose value.

LOL! Its happened before. ELectronic certs what? Sorry that company doesn't exist goodbye.
 
Posted by PCola77 on :
 
Okay, for the sake of argument, let's say that your ridiculous scenario actually comes to pass.

Now I have 70,000 shares that can only be purchased through the company TA. How many people that don't currently own shares do you think will go through all the baloney to set up an account to buy shares of this wacky company? You think there will be ANY buy pressure? Who the hell would go through the hassle to buy a penny stock with this much baggage? The shares will become virtually worthless immediately, because NO ONE will want to buy them. You seriously think otherwise?

quote:
Originally posted by LT:
quote:
Originally posted by PCola77:
No, if you hold shares electronically, the broker takes care of the exchange, even if they've never had paper certs for you.

wrong..... the reason RPH said from the very begining to get Hard Copy certs was he knew the float was bought up and the MM's were trading AIR Shares....thats the reason for HCC's...and when we go back to trading on a Bigger market it wont be thru your broker or any broker for that matter...this company is about to do something that has never been done before.... this will be a short elimination.... very soon you will be giving your HCC's to a new in-house Transfer Agent , which will deposit your shares into your very own acct. with the company...there you will be able to log on thru the new corp. web site and see your acct..... real time financials , L2's ,etc... you will be able to set your price in the market for shorty to buy shares from you.... ohh yes there will be a Short Squeeze....since all trading goes thru the company's in-house T/A , DTC Agent, theres no Illegal trading...

 
Posted by TimW on :
 
Well shorts technically are legally required to buy them.
 
Posted by LT on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by TimW:
quote:
Originally posted by PCola77:
No, if you hold shares electronically, the broker takes care of the exchange, even if they've never had paper certs for you.

Unfortunately electronic shares are not FDIC insured and may lose value.

LOL! Its happened before. ELectronic certs what? Sorry that company doesn't exist goodbye.

BINGO !!..so now you see the reason for the HCC's... [Big Grin]
 
Posted by LT on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by TimW:
Well shorts technically are legally required to buy them.

Federal MARGIN calls !!!!

there will be a short squeeze..... [Big Grin]
 
Posted by LT on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by PCola77:
Okay, for the sake of argument, let's say that your ridiculous scenario actually comes to pass.

Now I have 70,000 shares that can only be purchased through the company TA. How many people that don't currently own shares do you think will go through all the baloney to set up an account to buy shares of this wacky company? You think there will be ANY buy pressure? Who the hell would go through the hassle to buy a penny stock with this much baggage? The shares will become virtually worthless immediately, because NO ONE will want to buy them. You seriously think otherwise?

quote:
Originally posted by LT:
quote:
Originally posted by PCola77:
No, if you hold shares electronically, the broker takes care of the exchange, even if they've never had paper certs for you.

wrong..... the reason RPH said from the very begining to get Hard Copy certs was he knew the float was bought up and the MM's were trading AIR Shares....thats the reason for HCC's...and when we go back to trading on a Bigger market it wont be thru your broker or any broker for that matter...this company is about to do something that has never been done before.... this will be a short elimination.... very soon you will be giving your HCC's to a new in-house Transfer Agent , which will deposit your shares into your very own acct. with the company...there you will be able to log on thru the new corp. web site and see your acct..... real time financials , L2's ,etc... you will be able to set your price in the market for shorty to buy shares from you.... ohh yes there will be a Short Squeeze....since all trading goes thru the company's in-house T/A , DTC Agent, theres no Illegal trading...

this will trade on more markets then Google currently does..... we are gona be World Wide....
 
Posted by PCola77 on :
 
OKay, so who forces the "federal margin call"? Why wouldn't E*Trade or whoever say, "Uh, yeah, we held air shares before, but now we got real ones for you. You're good..." and not actually make any effort to get them?

I've heard of people drinking kool-aid, but you've got to be the most...committed is probably the right word... shareholder I've ever seen from any company...

Best of luck to you, and I hope it works out, but I think your "exit" is totally preposterous. Most people bought into this because of some huge amount of stated assets. I'd bet that, had the plan all along been an elaborate plan to "trap the shorts", most people would have laughed and moved on, and never thought about this one again. Every crackpot pinky CEO on earth tries the ol' "get the shorts" pump once in a while.
 
Posted by PCola77 on :
 
Oh, and by the way, one other thing that I had thought, but just now had a few minutes to look into, is how does Rufus intend to get arround the fact that cornering the market and forcing a short squeeze is ILLEGAL? Or does he not mind going to federal prison for a while so the shareholders benefit? LOL.
 
Posted by glassman on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by PCola77:
Oh, and by the way, one other thing that I had thought, but just now had a few minutes to look into, is how does Rufus intend to get arround the fact that cornering the market and forcing a short squeeze is ILLEGAL? Or does he not mind going to federal prison for a while so the shareholders benefit? LOL.

i'm not sure i understand what you mean illegal..

there's alot of things us peasants beleive(d) are illegal that just plain aren't...

after accumulating 5% or more of the OS of a stock you, or any individual become an insider, and must file appropriate paperwork, but there's absolutely no rules against forcing short squeezes that i know of...

forcing one is not nearly as easy as some people think tho.

having value in a company is usually needed...

the other issue is that the players that are short have have a reason to buy the shares to cover. like good news, or falling value in the colateral they put up.

in the last few years? the DTC/NSCC seemt to be much happier just chargoing interest on the shares they loaned out than they do calling in the loan...
 
Posted by PCola77 on :
 
Glassman, yes, it is illegal. It is considered manipulation to do something to FORCE a short squeeze, like buying up the float and holding your shares for "unreasonable" prices. You can rty to create a short squeeze by, like you said, having real, tangible VALUE in a company (not that a pink sheet company would ever do something like that...).

I'll do my search again and find some examples. I think I just googled "illegal market manipulation and short squeeze".

i have some work to do, but I'll do it sometime today if no one else does it first.
 
Posted by LT on :
 

 
Posted by LT on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by LT:
quote:
Originally posted by PCola77:
Glassman, yes, it is illegal. It is considered manipulation to do something to FORCE a short squeeze, like buying up the float and holding your shares for "unreasonable" prices. You can rty to create a short squeeze by, like you said, having real, tangible VALUE in a company (not that a pink sheet company would ever do something like that...).

I'll do my search again and find some examples. I think I just googled "illegal market manipulation and short squeeze".

i have some work to do, but I'll do it sometime today if no one else does it first.

lol...are you kidding me ?.... the float was bought up , but not by RPH.... after the merger was signed the last of the REAL shares were bought up but not by him... he said there was around 6 million left after the merger..... the MM's have been selling AIR since July of 2006..MILLIONS of AIR shares !!...LOL..... why do you think they had to keep this from hitting $5.00 !!!...they knew once it hit there it was all over !!....institutions start buying there !.....they had to run it back down... have it bashed to death... have their cronies run to the SEC and cry fraud !....it has to be stopped so they didnt have to cover .... All they have done is delayed this ending ..it will only be worse now for them....nowhere to run or hide...they will be forced to cover any Naked Short they have ...thats were the shareholders come into play....They can name their price in the market , ALONG with the 6:1 will kill shorty ..... [Big Grin]

 
Posted by PCola77 on :
 
Okay, sure... Good luck to you. I'll be sitting here watching for the magical 6:1. Hope it comes for you all.
 
Posted by wallymac on :
 
fan·ta·sy (fnt-s, -z) KEY

NOUN:
pl. fan·ta·sies
The creative imagination; unrestrained fancy. See Synonyms at imagination.
Something, such as an invention, that is a creation of the fancy.
A capricious or fantastic idea; a conceit.

Fiction characterized by highly fanciful or supernatural elements.
An example of such fiction.
An imagined event or sequence of mental images, such as a daydream, usually fulfilling a wish or psychological need.
An unrealistic or improbable supposition.

Music See fantasia.
A coin issued especially by a questionable authority and not intended for use as currency.
Obsolete A hallucination
 
Posted by Igor R on :
 
Looks like we ended the day on a high note, .0001 LOL.
 
Posted by LT on :
 
Bad news for those that bought Illegal AIR shares on the GREY market.... you will have to deal with the BROKER that sold them to you , the company will not except these shares during the exchange.....the new T/A will use the NOBO List pulled just before the trading halt prior to the delist to the Greys....
wonder what the brokers will do ?...LOL... they have a new problem on their hands lol...
 
Posted by T e x on :
 
there's a different CUSIP?

lol...
 
Posted by LT on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by T e x:
there's a different CUSIP?

lol...

LOL is right .... [Big Grin]

how is this stock trading ??....LMAO

shouldnt be.......
no office , no phone , no employee's....
...no 15c211 filed....
whos paying the T/A ????...how is he able to print endless CERTIFICATES ??...lol....the ink never runs out on his printer....lol

gona be some people in some REAL Hot water soon..... [Big Grin]
 
Posted by LT on :
 
there was a Rumor about ben stanley being in jail in california....as one of the three rumored a few days ago in texas and cali......

THIS RUMOR IS FALSE !......BEN IS WELL .....

[Big Grin]
 
Posted by TimW on :
 
WHat a relief!! I think I speak for all of us at allstocks when I say I was becoming worried about Ben. [Roll Eyes]
 
Posted by glassman on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by PCola77:
Glassman, yes, it is illegal. It is considered manipulation to do something to FORCE a short squeeze, like buying up the float and holding your shares for "unreasonable" prices. You can rty to create a short squeeze by, like you said, having real, tangible VALUE in a company (not that a pink sheet company would ever do something like that...).

I'll do my search again and find some examples. I think I just googled "illegal market manipulation and short squeeze".

i have some work to do, but I'll do it sometime today if no one else does it first.

that sounds reasonable to me..

the problem i have is with the term illegal. there's alot of things people think are illegal that just aren't.. like NS'ing by non MM's...

they SOUND illegal if you read the "rules" but the SEC is not just looking the other way because they are lazy....

i'll try to dig up some court testimony recently given in a NC Federal case where an SEC attorney pretty clearly stated that NSing by other than MM's is NOT illgal, and only would be if Congress acted on it..

it SEEMS to be against the rules, but creative rule interpretation is why the corporate lawyers drive Lamboghinis if'n they're want'n too...

the MM's have the legal ability to ceate liquidity to stop what you are suggesting, and that would hurt whoever was trying to "corner" the market...

the MM's (IMO) are not the true source of the naked shorting PROBLEMS we are seeing market wide tho..

it seems to me that the real perps are hedges.
 
Posted by a surfer on :
 
Interesting read...

Sorry about the length but I could not link it.


Ladies and Gentleman: I am a private investor/trader and I am writing in response to concerns that I have regarding short selling abuses I have witnessed in the OTCBB marketplace.

Introduction: It appears that the SEC has deliberately, either through inaction or clever manipulation of the SEC's rule structure as suggested over the years by Brokerage's attorneys, created a two tier system of stock market exchanges in the US. One system for the national market exchanges that has short selling protections for the investor with pockets deep enough to afford the several dollar and up prices for stock, and a second system of exchanges for the "poor" investor, those investors who have determined they can only afford stocks trading at less than 10 cents, and who has not been afforded the same short selling protections deemed as necessary solutions to the stock market crash of 1929, namely the 1934 SEC act. This has created a system whereby the "rich" investor is protected from short selling abuses, while the "poor" investor is cheated by short selling abuses (bear raids) that are allowed by self regulation of the Market Makers. Most poor investors have been drilled by educators on the stock market crash of 1929 in grade school, and truly believe that the protections enacted in 1934 exist for them too, when in reality a double or multiple standard has been deliberately contrived.
Is the SEC implicated in a scheme to defraud OTCBB investors of their hard earned dollars? The SEC has allowed the structure of securities laws to favor big money interests and "manipulation of the little guy" over and above the interests and concern of the vast majority of the investing American public. The current SEC rule structure has parallels similar to the character "The Sheriff Nottingham" where the poor are robbed to pay for the rich. America is not supposed to be this way!

Discussion: Bid and Ask Volume and how it relates to Technical Analysis of a Stock.
It has become painfully obvious that big money Market Makers have a stranglehold on the little guy in the OTCBB stock market. I have personally observed many times more than a 1:2 (bid:ask) volume ratio of the trades executing at the bid versus the ask, only to be followed by the bid and ask ticking down in stocks that I own.
A discussion of the technical mechanics of an OTCBB investor's reality is in order here.
A comprehensive study of OTCBB time and sales reports with actual buys and sells listed proves that certain market participants sell at the ask, and buy at the bid. These reports were, for about a year, available to anyone requesting them free of charge from:
https://www.otcbb.com/secure_asp/tradeact_report_request.asp?type=tands
However, recently a pricing structure was devised that makes these reports much too expensive for many investors. Nevertheless, these reports, when combined with other data that report the time and price level of the inside bid and ask, do establish that some market participants are able to buy at bid and sell at ask. Why is this noteworthy? Because a common technical method of measuring accumulation / distri-bution of a stock is to measure the volume of trades at the bid (selling), and compare it to the volume of trades at the ask (buying), and to note the ratio of the two. Theoretically speaking a ratio of 1:1 should represent an equilibrium level where price neither goes up or down, since it shows that buying and selling activity are roughly equal. If there is more trading volume at the ask than at the bid, then price should go up, and conversely if there is more trading volume at the bid, then price should go down. But in the OTCBB world, it's common knowledge that a ratio of about 1:2.5 or 1:3 (volume at bid to volume at ask) is required to move the price up, and this up-move is often delayed by days and sometimes weeks. On the other hand, for prices to move down requires only fractionally less than 1:3. Prices commonly drop when the ratio is 1:2 or less.
Why is the ratio so much greater than the theoretical 1:1?
In these instances which happen everyday in most OTCBB stocks there is more trading occurring at the ask than the bid, yet price falls! Why? Certain market participants are allowed to routinely buy at the bid and sell at the ask and these participants do much more selling at the ask than buying at the bid:
In order too fool the general public that uses technical analysis in their trading arsenal into believing more buying is taking place than is actually occurring.

Additionally, the market participants doing the majority of the selling at the ask (the Market Makers) are not the same entities as the market participants doing the buying at the bid. It is my contention that this is allowed by the SEC to deliberately fool the "little guy", thereby allowing the Market Makers to conceal sells in the ticker tape while simultaneously making them appear to be buys because they occur at the ask. This should be considered Market Maker Manipulation, but unfortunately under the current rules it is allowed. Has the SEC been implicated in fraud by allowing this type of unusual buying and selling activity by certain market specialists, while at the same time other market participants, namely the general public do not receive such favorable prices for similar trades? Volume Manipulation and the "Market Maker orchestrated Pump and Dump" Volume Manipulation is another area where Market Maker's collude to create the impression that there is more activity, accumulation or distribution, then there actually is.
For example;
Market Maker A buys 100K from Market Maker B,
-who then sells them to Market Maker C,
-who then sells them to Market Maker D,
-making it appear as if there is 300K worth of volume.
All that was really happening was; a "Churn" game that served to inflate volume for the day.
For a more in depth discussion of how this works, please see The Forbes article titled "One Day Soon the Music's Going to Stop"
http://www.forbes.com/forbes/072996/5803072a.htm
The core aspect of this manipulation is the structure of NASDAQ's ACT system itself, and which can be discerned by studying the buys and sells as they are reported in the OTCBB ‘time and sales reports’, and by studying the reporting as it occurs in the ACT system. The major distinguishing feature here is that Market Maker to Market Maker transactions are recorded on the sell side only (same as an investor buy). In contrast, the ACT system records both buys and sells by Market Makers when the trade is being made with the general public.

Lets look at a few examples, and please note that the side of the trade is inverted depending upon the market participants "point of view."
• When a Market Maker buys from the general public, it's the same as an investor sell, it is recorded as an ACT system buy or "B".
• When a Market Maker sells to the General public, which is the same as an investor buy, it is recorded as an ACT system sell or "S".
So the Market Makers report both buys and sells to the general public. Unfortunately here is where the rules change to the detriment of the average investor: A Market Maker to Market Maker transaction is recorded solely on the sell side as an "S", not on the buy "B" side. If a Market Maker buys from another Market Maker, it is not recorded in the ACT system as a "B", it is only the selling Market Maker that reports it.
This is the core reason that it appears in the real time price stream for OTCBB stocks that a bid:ask ratio of greater than 1:3 is often required in order for prices to move up, since a Market Maker to Market Maker transaction represents no change in the supply demand equilibrium of a stock.
The excess over 1:1 is Market Makers trading with each other. All sorts of technical accumulation / distribution models use volume in their calculations, and this churn game, where Market Makers sell to each other, can be used to manipulate the buying and selling of many of those who use such technical models in their trading. These types of churn trades are all but impossible to discern from retail trades and to my knowledge are currently completely impossible to discern in real-time. The Market Makers combine this "churn" trading, with artificial price walk downs and naked shorting, and you have the potential of complete Market Maker Manipulation of the whole price and volume chart. This would be exceedingly profitable to conspirators at critical technical junctures such as the apex of triangles and quiet, pre-breakout trading ranges to make it appear that the order flow is going opposite to the "real" order flow.
Why are MarketMaker's are allowed to report these churn trades (Market Maker to Market Maker) as volume, since supposedly a Market Maker is only concerned with "making a market?" There is no legitimate need for volume figures reported in real-time price streams as well as end-of-day price reports to include Market Maker to Market Maker transactions. After all, who is the market being made for? Another Market Maker?
Volume manipulation is a type of "pump and dump" scheme orchestrated by and for the benefit of the Market Makers themselves. It works like this:
• The Market Makers start selling to each other to artificially inflate the volume figure over a period of days to generate investor interest, but they do not yet start Naked Shorting.
• Now after some number of investors have laid down their hard earned money and there has been some price appreciation, Market Makers then start to Naked Short the position, effectively capturing the Investors Money, as price erodes due to the dilution that the creation of the short positions cause.
• This capture of investors money occurs in the event the investor has a stop loss figured into their trading strategy which mandates them to limit their losses, so they sell due to price erosion caused by Naked Shorting. Stop loss's are always recommended in beginner's guides to technical analysis and automated trading strategies. I wonder why?
• In any case these stop loss strategies combined with the flawed reporting structure of the real time price stream, line the Market Makers pockets with huge sums of money.

Naked Shorting, Sophisticated Hedging, and Price Manipulation.
• Thomas Jefferson once said something to the effect: "Any man has the right to swing his arm as far as the next mans nose, but no further." Allowing large and sophisticated portfolio holders to short, against a stock I hold long, as a hedging tactic, when another company’s shares are the other leg of the said hedge, and further which has the effect of causing my stock holdings to tick downwards, is a violation of Thomas Jeffersons idea.
• In a similar fashion so does Naked Shorting. Namely, that sophisticated hedging and Naked Shorting tactics "extend their arms into and through my nose." These types of tactics should be stopped since they run counter to the ideals of the vast majority of Americans, and the spirit, if not the letter of the law, as envisioned by our Founding Fathers. No one should be able to sell what they don't own, only what they do own! To sell something before it's purchased is not a stock sale, it's a hybrid stock/futures transaction, since the timeline is artificially reversed. It's nothing more than a promise to purchase at some time in the future, and in the OTCBB the suspicion is that it's often later, rather than sooner. This contrasts with what release No. 34-42037 suggests about short selling: The buy to cover is "usually the same day the purchase of the short sale is executed." On the other hand, an outright stock buy carries no implication to sell at any time in the future, and the same can be said of a normal sell when the buy occurred first...no further obligation to buy or sell further. The current practice of Naked Shorting and also Hedging calls into question the entire ethics of our legal system as it relates to the purchase and sale of a company's stock. Why do you allow the Market Makers, when acting in their roles as "bona-fide Market Makers," the right to short a stock without even an affirmative determination of the existence of shares to short against?

This activity of Market Makers essentially makes counterfeit shares of a company, then introduces them into the supply demand equilibrium of any particular stock in order to deflate or dilute the current value of each share held by shareholders. It's stated that this is done so that investors aren't forced to pay artificially high prices during short and temporary supply demand imbalances. Why aren't Market Makers required to be responsible to the Company and it's shareholders with respect to an accounting of the Short Interest in real time held by Market Makers?

There is no oversight currently that insures that Market Makers are covering their short sales when the temporary order imbalance is corrected. It appears to many OTCBB traders that the Market Makers are keeping their short sales many days before covering. A similar suggestion was made as documented in the SEC Release No. 34-42037, File No. S7-24-99 in the sections C, Previous Reviews of Short Selling, item 3, 1991 Congressional Report on Short Selling, specifically numbered items (7) and (8). This lack of action from the SEC has let the Market Makers dictate the supply and demand for any given stock they make a market in and thereby they also control or "manipulate" the pricing of each and every share, for extended periods of time.

"Section 10(a) of the Exchange Act gives the Commission plenary authority to regulate short sales of securities registered on a national securities exchange, as necessary to protect investors" If this is so, why aren't the short sales of OTCBB stocks regulated by the SEC? The SEC has allowed the OTCBB market to be self regulated by the NASDAQ, who in turn allow Brokers for OTCBB stocks to have "run away" naked shorting. I presume it has been convenient for the Market Makers that the SEC has not determined that the OTCBB is a "national securities exchange." The inmates are running the asylum, and the SEC needs to wake up.

Conclusions:
Current Securities Law need to be amended with respect to the OTCBB market so that:
a) The Brokerage practice of Naked Shorting in the OTCBB market is stopped immediately. The number of outstanding shares of any stock should be fixed at whatever number the issuing company has determined. Trading entities must be prevented from "adding to the trading supply of stock available to purchasers," and by so doing diluting the price value of current shareholders.
b) Market Makers are disallowed the right to Short Sell OTCBB shares when the Market Makers are trading for their own accounts unless the seller personally owns the shares being sold. They should never have the right to borrow any other entities shares for this purpose under any circumstance whatsoever, due to their information advantage and greater flexibility granted to them through NASDAQ self regulation over other market participants such as the general public.
c) When the Market Maker is acting it it's role as a "bona fide Market Maker", the Market Makers must be forced to report the real time current total short sales accumulation numbers in aggregate form in the real-time price stream, available to all through many market data vendors at reasonable cost. Computer Technology now allows this with the simple addition of a few lines of code in publicly available price feeds. The OTCBB already has a portion of this capability in it's ACT system, but it's not available to the public at a reasonable cost, nor is it available in real-time to the general public, only to other Market Makers. Market Makers must be held responsible to companies and the shareholders for failing to report this critical market data freely to the trading public, as a check and balance on their own corrupt trading practices.
d) Churn trades between Market Makers should never be reported in the volume figure at all. This would halt Market Maker orchestrated and price stream centered "pump and dump" schemes.
e) Violations of these suggested changes to existing law should be enforced with mandatory jail time, not merely monetary punishments, which serve as little deterrent when contrasted with the huge sums of money they are culling from investors day in and day out. The current monetary fines imposed by the SEC for violations of SEC rules are relatively speaking "pocket change" to the corporate firms involved. They are nothing more than a token "slap on the wrist." Where is Robin Hood when you need him?

Kenneth Klaser, Private Investor/Trader United States of America
 
Posted by PCola77 on :
 
Got a summary? [Big Grin]
 
Posted by T e x on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by LT:
quote:
Originally posted by T e x:
there's a different CUSIP?

lol...

LOL is right .... [Big Grin]

how is this stock trading ??....LMAO

shouldnt be.......
no office , no phone , no employee's....
...no 15c211 filed....
whos paying the T/A ????...how is he able to print endless CERTIFICATES ??...lol....the ink never runs out on his printer....lol

gona be some people in some REAL Hot water soon..... [Big Grin]

lol, you goof...

it's still trading because due process has not yet shut it down, run its course. It's really no big mystery.

Kinda like "why did they allow Alex to pull the chit he did for so long?"

lol, you were one of those "Best-Picks" members, right? Surely, you wouldn't deny that...
 
Posted by Jo4321 on :
 
I haven't been paying a lot of attention to this stock, but today my account shows N/A instead of an amount of shares. Did it finally close shop?

Jo
 
Posted by PCola77 on :
 
Jo, mine are still showing in Choicetrade. Interestingly, I just put an order in to buy 30,000 shares at .0050 to get myself up to an even 100,000, and immediately saw a trade go through at .002 that wasn't mine. Mine still has yet to execute. The market is so shady sometimes... [Smile]
 
Posted by PCola77 on :
 
Okay, my order finally filled. Just tossed away another $150 to get to an even 100,000 shares. Let's see this get to a buck [Razz]
 
Posted by Bottomfeeder on :
 
Looks to me like its up 3000% on the day with a little over 854k s traded.is at .0031
 
Posted by PCola77 on :
 
Yeah, there's a lot of volume today for some reason, but I don't think the price is really indicative of anything. As I found out, my order was filled at .0050, putting it up almost 5000% for the day, but is essentially meaningless, because the next sell could put it right back at .0001.
 
Posted by TimW on :
 
Who wants to go halves with me and buy the float?

LOL
 
Posted by stockcop on :
 
Can you actually buy this *.001 and sell *.004 or something?
Or is this for pure amusement purposes?
 
Posted by TimW on :
 
All you can do is say you want to buy and say you want to sell and take whatever price you are given.
 
Posted by LT on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by stockcop:
Can you actually buy this *.001 and sell *.004 or something?
Or is this for pure amusement purposes?

sure you can buy it . but your not buying REAL shares..they took your $$ and gave you something that doesnt exist.... they will not be honered by the company ....GL dealing with your broker when all this hits the fan ....lol
 
Posted by LT on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by TimW:
Who wants to go halves with me and buy the float?

LOL

LOL...that was done a year and 1/2 ago..... [Big Grin]
 
Posted by PCola77 on :
 
You're unreal. Do you have tunnel vision or something? Read his question again and try to post an answer that somehow relate to his question, instead of parroting this "air shares" BS, would ya?


quote:
Originally posted by LT:
quote:
Originally posted by stockcop:
Can you actually buy this *.001 and sell *.004 or something?
Or is this for pure amusement purposes?

sure you can buy it . but your not buying REAL shares..they took your $$ and gave you something that doesnt exist.... they will not be honered by the company ....GL dealing with your broker when all this hits the fan ....lol

 
Posted by LT on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by PCola77:
You're unreal. Do you have tunnel vision or something? Read his question again and try to post an answer that somehow relate to his question, instead of parroting this "air shares" BS, would ya?


quote:
Originally posted by LT:
quote:
Originally posted by stockcop:
Can you actually buy this *.001 and sell *.004 or something?
Or is this for pure amusement purposes?

sure you can buy it . but your not buying REAL shares..they took your $$ and gave you something that doesnt exist.... they will not be honered by the company ....GL dealing with your broker when all this hits the fan ....lol

Air shares are BS i agree with yaa on that ..... [Big Grin] ..and it will be dealt with ...
 
Posted by LT on :
 
Filed in the Federal Registry December 28, 2007 .

http://a257.g.akamaitech.net/7/257/2422/01jan20071800/edocket.access.gpo.gov/200 7/E7-25179.htm

II. Description

NASD Rule 11810(i) sets, forth the procedures that must be followed when a party is owed securities that have become the subject of a voluntary corporate action, such as a tender or exchange offer is seeking delivery of those securities. Under Rule 11810(i), the owed party delivers a liability notice to the owing or failing party. The liability notice sets a cut off date for the delivery of the securities by the owing party and provides notice to the owing party that it will be held liable for any damages caused by its failure to deliver the securities in time for the owed party to participate in the voluntary corporate action. If the owing party delivers the securities in response to the liability notice, it has met its delivery obligation. If the owing party fails to deliver the securities in sufficient time for the owed party to participate in the voluntary corporate action, it will be liable for any damages that may accrue thereby (i.e., the owing party must deliver proceeds equivalent to the proceeds that the owed party would have received if it had been able to participate in the offer). The owed party has the responsibility to communicate its intentions to the owing party and to prove, if necessary, that the owing party received the liability notice.

. [Big Grin]
 
Posted by T e x on :
 
Have no idea who "filed" that garbled passage--or where you think you're going with this--but somebody overlooked a lil sumpin' sumpin...notice the bold, my emphasis, following:

quote:
With respect to transactions executed on Nasdaq, failure to deliver the securities sold, or failure to pay for securities as delivered, on or after the settlement date, does not effect a cancellation of the contract. The remedy for the buyer or seller is provided for by Rules 11810 and 11820 respectively unless the parties mutually consent to cancel the trade. In every such case of nondelivery of securities, the party in default shall be liable for any damages which may accrue thereby. All claims for such damages shall be made promptly.
http://sec.gov/rules/other/nasdaqllcf1a4_5/nasdaqllcamendrules11000.pdf

Since when has this company done anything promptly?

Anyway, PCola's correct--you should try to answer questions directly, without the sneer and spin...
 
Posted by Ocqueoc on :
 
I would like to take this time to wish all the great people I have "met" on here

A Happy New Year!!!!
 
Posted by glassman on :
 
Tex, how are we supposed to know when we have been "damaged"?

most state laws concerning fraud have a clause in the statute of limitations that basically says the clock doesn't start ticking until you discover the fraud, or should reasonably been able to..

in other words? if it isn't filed in a filing (my best choice for reliable information) or posted on a conspicuous news wire? you can't "really" discover it..

i heard an interesting interview on the radio while i was going over the river and thru the woods last week...

it was about contract law and how the States have no right to abrogate contracts. only the Feds can... so Federal Law would have to be applied? i dunno yet... gotta do some more searching


this article is a year plus old now, but it's just more evidence that the MM's are not the true problem...
November 1, 2006, 8:40 am
SEC Examining Naked Shorting at NYC Hedge Fund
Posted by Peter Lattman

dfadAnother hedge fund in hot water: The SEC is poised to bring charges against a New York hedge fund for violating short-selling rules, reports today’s New York Post.

Sandell Asset Management, a $7 billion hedge fund run by former Bear Stearns big wig Thomas Sandell, was told by the agency on Oct. 19 that it “intends to recommend the commencement of proceedings” against the fund. The charges related to allegations of “naked short-selling,”

Short sellers sell borrowed shares in hopes they can profit by replacing them later at a lower price. “Naked” short sellers do not borrow shares they sell short, which some liken to counterfeiting. The SEC has been urged by some lawmakers and executives to be more vigilant in policing naked shorting.

Sandell told its investors that the probe centers around trading in Hibernia Corp., which was acquired last year by Capital One. “We dispute several of the commission’s assertions,” Sandell wrote to investors. “But we are continuing to work with the staff to resolve this matter.”
Permalink | Trackback URL: http://bl ogs.wsj.com/law/2006/11/01/sec-examining-naked-shorting-at-nyc-hedge-fund/trackb ack



http://bl ogs.wsj.com/law/2006/11/01/sec-examining-naked-shorting-at-nyc-hedge-fund/
 
Posted by glassman on :
 
here's the article i mentioned earlier where the SEC attorney seems to be admitting that NS'ing is perfectly legal:
October 26, 2007, 2:17 pm
Federal Judge Tells SEC Lawyer “Sit Down, Shut Up”
Posted by Peter Lattman

northcarolinaJudge Graham Mullen on Wednesday dismissed part of an SEC civil lawsuit alleging that a former executive at Friedman Billings Ramsey engaged in illegal conduct related to a securities offering. The claim alleged that John Mangan Jr. committed a so-called Section 5 violation involving a Pipe, or private investment in public equity. Representing Mangan: George Covington of King & Spalding in Charlotte and James Wyatt at Wyatt & Blake. Said Wyatt to the Observer: “We firmly believe (the case) will be resolved in his favor because we believe he has done absolutely nothing wrong.”

While the case is interesting — especially for those of you obsessed with the controversy surrounding Pipes and naked short selling — what’s interesting to us is this excerpt from the transcript of Wednesday’s oral argument on Mangan’s motion to dismiss.

Judge Mullen: Naked shorts are not legal, are they?

SEC lawyer Amy Greer: No. No, they’re just very risky, Your Honor.

SEC lawyer Catherine Pappas: And Your Honor –

Judge Mullen: They’re not illegal; they’re just risky.

Greer: Correct. Naked short sales are not illegal; they’re just risky, Your Honor.

Judge Mullen: Why in the world don’t you all make them illegal? Don’t you understand what happens in the market when you allow naked short selling to attack companies? I mean, do you understand that?

Greer: Your Honor, I think that that’s an issue for the United States Congress. I appreciate your concern –

Judge Mullen: Well –

Greer: — and I –

Judge Mullen: — the answer to my question is, yeah, I understand it or, no, I don’t.

Greer: I do understand your –

Judge Mullen: Do not try — okay.

Greer: I do understand, Your Honor.

Judge Mullen: Thank you for understanding it.

Covington: Your Honor, one thing –

Judge Mullen: Excuse the interruption.

Covington: No, sir.

Judge Mullen: Sit down, shut up, let the man talk. I’m not going to let him introduce (sic) you. Last warning.

Pappas: I’m sorry?

Judge Mullen: Sit down –

Pappas: Yeah, I got that.

Judge Mullen: — shut up, let the man talk. Last warning.

Pappas: Okay.

Judge Mullen: Understood?

Pappas: Okay.

Judge Mullen: Excellent.

Covington: With all due respect, Your Honor –

Judge: And you don’t interrupt her when she’s talking.

Covington: Yes, sir.

Judge: Proceed.

“Sit down, shut up, let the man talk”? Wow. Readers, what do you make of the exchange?
Permalink | Trackback URL: http://b logs.wsj.com/law/2007/10/26/federal-judge-tells-sec-lawyer-sit-down-shut-up/trac kback/




http://b logs.wsj.com/law/2007/10/26/federal-judge-tells-sec-lawyer-sit-down-shut-up/
 
Posted by glassman on :
 
if i remember correclty? there was a PIPE in this deal before Rufus got involved...

the company deliberately broke the PIPE contract by buying shares on the open market, it put FHAL into immediate default, and i've never been able to figure out what exactly happened to the PIPE deal... maybe someone flipped that rock over and found out which snake slithered out and i missed it?
 
Posted by T e x on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by glassman:
if i remember correclty? there was a PIPE in this deal before Rufus got involved...

the company deliberately broke the PIPE contract by buying shares on the open market, it put FHAL into immediate default, and i've never been able to figure out what exactly happened to the PIPE deal... maybe someone flipped that rock over and found out which snake slithered out and i missed it?

ya, we chopped it up, you and I. Can't remember now whether that was before or after our "famous" discussment about with prejudice re BBAN. But we both noticed the peculiar loan terms

At any rate, CSHD does not rate the level of argument that GLUV/GVRP/MAMG or BCIT have "earned." Buy-in provisions are way different--in reference to your question about "when we notice damages."

In the GVRP play, we really notice damages when the reverse into MAMG is NEVER on the dailylist. (How long does that take to sink in?)

In BCIT, we really notice when WE GET SUED.

In CSHD, we pretty much know first rattle outta the box sumpin is up. By the time "buy the crap out of it" rolls around, we gotta be wary for sure when the 6-to-1 "not a divvy" pops up.

At the very latest, re CSHD, we gotta be alarmed when the CEO/company rolls over for the TRO.
 
Posted by Ace of Spades on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by T e x:
quote:
Originally posted by glassman:
if i remember correclty? there was a PIPE in this deal before Rufus got involved...

the company deliberately broke the PIPE contract by buying shares on the open market, it put FHAL into immediate default, and i've never been able to figure out what exactly happened to the PIPE deal... maybe someone flipped that rock over and found out which snake slithered out and i missed it?

ya, we chopped it up, you and I. Can't remember now whether that was before or after our "famous" discussment about with prejudice re BBAN. But we both noticed the peculiar loan terms

At any rate, CSHD does not rate the level of argument that GLUV/GVRP/MAMG or BCIT have "earned." Buy-in provisions are way different--in reference to your question about "when we notice damages."

In the GVRP play, we really notice damages when the reverse into MAMG is NEVER on the dailylist. (How long does that take to sink in?)

In BCIT, we really notice when WE GET SUED.

In CSHD, we pretty much know first rattle outta the box sumpin is up. By the time "buy the crap out of it" rolls around, we gotta be wary for sure when the 6-to-1 "not a divvy" pops up.

At the very latest, re CSHD, we gotta be alarmed when the CEO/company rolls over for the TRO.

Tex...did you know that I was the first person to post the news about the FHAL merger...I brought this news to allstocks.....before I was the Ace of spades....I was Batman and Penny Pimp..LoL...I changed my settings so much they restricted it...Since you are a mod..you could probably figure this out some how...

posted July 12, 2006 09:58 AM

http://www.allstocks.com/stockmessageboard/cgi-bin/ultimatebb.cgi/ubb/get_topic/ f/8/t/022582/p/21.html?
 
Posted by T e x on :
 
Sorry, "Claydough" beat you, by almost two hours:

quote:
Claydough
Member


Member Rated:
posted July 12, 2006 07:05 AM
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
12-Jul-2006

Entry into a Material Definitive Agreement, Completion of Acquisiti


from what I can tell, you posted at 8:58 am...
 
Posted by T e x on :
 
Here was my first post of any substance:

quote:


T e x
Member


posted July 12, 2006 02:21 PM
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Originally posted by wallymac:
TEX. Are you in this? What's your take
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

http://stockcharts.com/h-sc/ui?s=FHAL&p=D&yr=0&mn=6&dy=0&id=p85820198930

http://stockcharts.com/h-sc/ui?s=FHAL&p=D&yr=0&mn=6&dy=0&id=p26866918370

lol, wally, I *wanna* believe, but the charts are holding me back, at least for the moment...see the sharp angles on ADX & Aroon?

Then, notice how little volume required to bring it down? I think given the potential, it's worth it to me to await confirmation and give up some points on entry... if it goes sky high? plenty of room left to enter...but, hey--that's just me...

--------------------
Nashoba Holba Chepulechi
Adventures in microcapitalism...

Didn't read further in that thread, but the next thing worth mentioning that I remember posting about was the gap to be filled.
 
Posted by glassman on :
 
i didn't get involved in this till it was over a dollar... just about the time the marines needed to be called in [Big Grin]

 -
 
Posted by Ace of Spades on :
 
...........It appears that I was not the first to attack FHAL...LoL.. [Big Grin] .... [Eek!]
 
Posted by SuperSniper00 on :
 
Wow i havent signed onto the board for awhile and i cant believe this POS is still being talked about lol
 
Posted by T e x on :
 
lol, nobody much really cares, as far as a Phoenix-like resurection goes...is pretty much down to the death-chant few, from what I can tell.
 
Posted by unclerudy on :
 
So is anything happening with this stock?
 
Posted by TimW on :
 
Nothin worth wettin ur undies
 
Posted by Mr. CATIAEngineer on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by unclerudy:
So is anything happening with this stock?

Hey man hows the new job? [Smile]
 
Posted by unclerudy on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by Mr. CATIAEngineer:
quote:
Originally posted by unclerudy:
So is anything happening with this stock?

Hey man hows the new job? [Smile]
Great! I got a 20% raise when I came here, built a new house, got married in May, and it has been almost a year and have not yet programmed once when I was hired for a programming job.
 
Posted by Mr. CATIAEngineer on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by unclerudy:
quote:
Originally posted by Mr. CATIAEngineer:
quote:
Originally posted by unclerudy:
So is anything happening with this stock?

Hey man hows the new job? [Smile]
Great! I got a 20% raise when I came here, built a new house, got married in May, and it has been almost a year and have not yet programmed once when I was hired for a programming job.
Congrats on the raise! Im not so sure about building a new house, getting married and doing work that you werent hired to do however. [Razz]
 
Posted by new2stocks on :
 
"haha, I just got a PM from new2stocks over at Allstocks (aka Dirtdigger). Apparently she didnt appreciate my post here today stating that she was being nasty to Crash. She left the message and then added me to her ignore list so I cant respond. Thats kinda funny.

But anyway, its pretty obvious that posts from here are still being taken over there......but I expected that. I think ill put her real name in my little black book of people I want to see punished for their slander.

Hi Dirtdigger Sorry but things arent likely gonna get better for you no matter how much condescending crap you post. "

Grow up MrCat. I don't know what your problem is with me, but if anyone is guilty of slander it is you. It seems you like to start touble where it is not needed.

Have a nice day
 
Posted by Mr. CATIAEngineer on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by new2stocks:


Have a nice day

Thank you
 
Posted by 401k on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by unclerudy:
quote:
Originally posted by Mr. CATIAEngineer:
quote:
Originally posted by unclerudy:
So is anything happening with this stock?

Hey man hows the new job? [Smile]
Great! I got a 20% raise when I came here, built a new house, got married in May, and it has been almost a year and have not yet programmed once when I was hired for a programming job.
Any more openings for programmers [Smile]
 
Posted by T e x on :
 
great question, lol
 
Posted by Ocqueoc on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by Ocqueoc:
I would like to take this time to wish all the great people I have "met" on here

A Happy New Year!!!!

And A Happy new year to you.
Isn't it nice that we have a board that we can send cheer to all of our "shareholders"?
Boy, back in the day, oh never mind!
 
Posted by Ocqueoc on :
 
sorry, double post [Roll Eyes]
 
Posted by glassman on :
 


PLAINTIFF'S BRIEF IN OPPOSITION TO DEFENDANT HARRIS'S MOTION TO COMPEL DISCOVERY AND FOR SANCTIONS FOR FAILING TO DISCLOSE

CIVIL DOCKET FOR CASE #: 1:06-cv-02568-CC Doc 26 filed 04 Jan 08

Date Filed # Docket Text

01/04/2008 26 RESPONSE in Opposition re 23 MOTION to Compel Discovery MOTION for Sanctions filed by Securities and Exchange Commission. (Black, Alana) (Entered: 01/04/2008)

http://rapidshare.com/files/81322440/010408_pacer.doc.html
----------------------------

Doc 26
OCR

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF GEORGIA
ATLANTA DIVISION
Civil Action No. 1:06-CV-2568-CC (N.D. Ga.)

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION,

Plaintiff,:

v.
CONVERSION SOLUTIONS HOLDING CORPORATION and
RUFUS PAUL HARRIS : a/k/a PAUL RUFUS HARRIS,
Defendants.

PLAINTIFF'S BRIEF IN OPPOSITION TO DEFENDANT HARRIS'S MOTION TO COMPEL DISCOVERY AND FOR SANCTIONS FOR FAILING TO DISCLOSE

Plaintiff, Securities and Exchange Commission ("Commission") files this Brief in Opposition to Defendant Rufus Paul Harris's Verified Motion to Compel Discovery and Motion for Sanctions for Failing to Disclose ("Motion to Compel Discovery and for Sanctions for Failing to Disclose").

INTRODUCTION

Defendant Harris has not conferred with Plaintiff's counsel as required by Fed.R.Civ.P. 37(a)(2) with regard to his Motion to Compel Discovery and for Sanctions for Failing to Disclose. Moreover, Harris's motion does not meet the procedural requirements of N.D.Ga. 37.[1]. Were the court to reach the merits of Harris's motion in spite of these defects, it should nonetheless deny the motion because it rests on a misunderstanding of the relevant law and a misstatement of the relevant facts.

PROCEDURAL POSTURE

The Complaint in this matter was filed on October 24, 2006. [1] On October 26, 2006, the Court issued an Order to Show Cause, Temporary Restraining Order, Order Prohibiting Destruction of Documents, and Order Expediting Discovery. On November 4, 2006, Harris was served with the Summons and Complaint, along with other associated documents. Harris's Answer to the Complaint was thus due to be filed not later than November 24, 2006. Conversion was served with the Summons and Complaint, along with other associated documents, through its registered agent for service of process, Harvard Business Services of Lewes, Delaware, on October26, 2006. Conversion's Answer to the Complaint was thus due to be filed not later than November 15, 2006.

[1] On the same day, the Securities and Exchange Commission exercised its statutory authority under Section 12(k) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 [15 U.S.C. §781(k)] to suspend trading in the securities of Conversion Solutions Holding Corp. for a ten-day period. The trading suspension was never part of the instant lawsuit, and this brief does not address various issues raised by Defendant Harris concerning it.

On November 7, 2006, this Court entered a preliminary injunction against Harris based on his consent. In the same order, the Court provided that Plaintiff could continue to take expedited discovery. On November 16, 2006, Plaintiff filed the returns of service of process for both Harris and Conversion with the Court. Thereafter, on November 16, 2006, Plaintiff applied to the Clerk for an entry of default as to Conversion. On November 17, 2006, the Clerk entered a default as to Conversion. On November 28, 2006, Plaintiff applied to the Clerk for an entry of default as to Harris. On November 29, 2006, the Clerk entered a default as to Harris.

On April 24, 2007, Harris filed with the Court a document styled "Defendant Conversion Solutions Holding's Answer and Defenses to Complaint for Injunctive and Other Relief'. On May 11, 2007, Plaintiff moved to strike this Answer. Subsequently, on May 15, 2007, Harris moved that the Clerk's entry of default be set aside and filed another Answer. On October 30, 2007, the Court granted Plaintiff's motion to strike the Answer and denied Harris's motion to set aside the entry of default as to himself individually and as to Conversion. On November 7, 2007, Harris filed a "Motion for Reconsideration/Rehearing of the Court's October 30, 2007 Order Entered by This Court" and a related Motion for Enlargement of Time to File Supplemental Affidavits. On November 16, 2007, Plaintiff filed a brief opposing both the motion for reconsideration and the motion for enlargement of time. On December 17, 2007, Harris filed two documents: a "Verified Motion to Compel Discovery and Motion for Sanctions for Failing to Disclose" and a "Supplemental Affidavit in Support of Motion for Reconsideration and in Opposition to Plaintiffs Motion for Default Judgment and Supporting Memorandum of Law."

FACTS

Defendant Harris appeared, under subpoena, for his own deposition on October 30, 2006. Because Harris was over six hours late for his deposition, he returned to continue his testimony on November 1, 2006.

In addition to Mr. Harris, Plaintiff has deposed seven other witnesses pursuant to the expedited discovery authorized by this Court's October 26 and November 7, 2007 Orders. Defendant Harris was provided with advance notice of each of these seven depositions; however, he did not attend any of them, not even those conducted locally in Atlanta or telephonically, which he presumably could have attended at little or no cost. The following table shows the depositions that Defendant Harris was provided notice of, but failed to attend:

Date of Notice Deposition Date Witness Location

10/26/2006 - 11/2/2006 (postponed from 10/31/2006 at
request of counsel for witness) Benjamin Stanley Atlanta, GA

10/27/2006 (call-in instructions provided 10/30/2006) 10/31/2006 Janet McGrath, Euroclear Bank New York, NY
(telephonic)

10/31/2006 (call-in instructions provided 11/1/2006) 11/3/2006 Frank Cristiano, Fidelity Management & Research Co. Boston, MA
(telephonic)

12/11/2006 - 1/9/2007 Darryl S. Horton Detroit, MI

12/11/2006 - 1/10/2007 Thomas Benson Detroit, MI

6/18/2007 - 6/26/2007 James P. Gee Atlanta, GA

9/11/2007 - 10/18/2007 Michael D. Alexander Fort Worth, TX


To Plaintiff's knowledge, Defendant Harris has not conducted any type of discovery in this case. To date, Plaintiff has not received notice of a single deposition, subpoena for documents, request for admission, or interrogatory by Defendant Harris. Moreover, to the best of Plaintiff's knowledge, Mr. Harris has not ordered any transcripts from the court reporting firm that transcribed the depositions taken by Plaintiff.

Defendant Harris claims in paragraphs 3 and 4 of his Motion to Compel Discovery and for Sanctions for Failing to Disclose that he conducted a "Rule 26 meeting" with counsel for Plaintiff on November 3 and 6, 2006. This claim is false. Harris has represented himself pro se throughout this lawsuit. Accordingly, counsel for Plaintiff has accepted and responded to numerous phone calls and e-mails from him at various times. These communications have varied widely in content [2]; however, none of them bore any resemblance to a conference pursuant to Fed.R.Civ.P. 26(f) to develop a discovery plan.

[2] Harris called counsel for Plaintiff on a number of occasions to discuss various proposals to "put assets into" Conversion Solutions. On May 9, 2007, Harris e-mailed counsel for Plaintiff concerning an apparently fraudulent deal in which an unidentified third party had offered to "place" with Conversion Solutions "U.S. Treasury Check Number(s) in denominations of $500M, totaling $2B." A copy of counsel for Plaintiff's reply e-mail to Harris, quoting his entire original message, is attached as Exhibit A to this Brief. In paragraph 9 of the Supplemental Affidavit he filed with the Court on December 17, 2007, Harris made the following bizarre, false allegation: "At one point during the negotiations, I supplied $2,000,000,000.00 in treasury checks to Alana Black and her assistant, I asked Alana to work with me and place them into CSHD to fund it and she stated that she would talk with the higher up's [sic] and contact me back. She never made the return call or followed up." This slanderous, baseless claim appears to be a reference to the May, 2007 e-mail exchange between Harris and counsel described above and attached as Exhibit A.

Next, Defendant Harris appears to claim in paragraph 4 of his Motion to Compel that counsel for Plaintiff offered to send him copies of all evidence gathered concerning the case, from whatever source, including trading records and free copies of all deposition transcripts. This claim is false.

In paragraph 9 of his Motion, Harris claims that counsel for Plaintiff "tricked him into a default situation" by negotiating with him. This claim is false. As discussed above, counsel for Plaintiff has spoken with Harris on numerous occasions throughout the case. During several of these discussions, Harris attempted to raise the issue of settlement. However, none of these conversations were meaningful or substantive settlement discussions. Moreover, counsel for Plaintiff never provided Harris with any assurance that Plaintiff would not seek entry of default if he failed to file an Answer.

In paragraph 11 of his motion, Harris claims that counsel for Plaintiff "seized the records of the Defendant" and would not grant him access to those records. This claim, too, is false. Plaintiff has not obtained any evidence in this case from criminal authorities, through seizure or otherwise.

It is possible, but not likely, that counsel for Plaintiff could have helped Defendant Harris understand these factual misstatements, had he conferred with her concerning the Verified Motion to Compel Discovery and Motion for Sanctions for Failing to Disclose before filing it. However, Harris did not confer with counsel for Plaintiff, and does not appear to have made any attempt to do so. Accordingly, counsel for Plaintiff learned of Harris's Motion only when it was filed.

LAW

Rule 26(a) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure sets forth certain required disclosures for parties in civil litigation before the federal courts. This court's local rules specify that the initial disclosures required by Fed.R.Civ.P. 26(a)(1) must be made at or within (30) days after the appearance of a defendant by answer or motion. N.D.Ga. 26.1(A).

Plaintiff has found only one case where a defendant sought sanctions against a plaintiff for failure to make disclosures under Fed.R.Civ.P. 26(a) after entry of default against the Defendant pursuant to Rule 55. In that case, the court found plaintiffs to have no obligation to make Rule 26(a) disclosures in light of the entry of default. See Porter v. Brancato, No. Civ. A. 96-2208-KHV, 1997 WL 150050, at *1 (D. Kan. Feb. 24, 1997). Rule 37 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure governs motions to compel disclosure or discovery. It requires that any motion to compel Rule 26(a) disclosure include a certification "that the movant has in good faith conferred or attempted to confer with the party not making the disclosure in an effort to secure the disclosure without court action." Fed.R.Civ.P. 27(a)(2)(A).

This district's local rules further specify that any motion to compel disclosure or discovery shall:

(1)Include the certification of counsel with regard to the duty to confer required by Fed.R.Civ.P. 37(a)(2)(A)(B);
(2)Quote verbatim each disclosure, interrogatory, deposition question, request for designation of deponent, or request for inspection to which objection is taken;
(3)State the specific objection;
(4)State the grounds assigned for the objection (if not apparent from the objection); and
(5)Cite authority and include a discussion of the reasons assigned as supporting the motion.

N.D.Ga. 37.1(A)(1-5). Furthermore, "[t]he motion shall be arranged so that the objection, grounds, authority, and supporting reasons follow the verbatim statement of each specific disclosure, interrogatory, deposition question, request for designation of deponent, or request for inspection to which an objection is raised." N.D.Ga. 37.1(A).

ARGUMENT

Harris's Motion should be denied, because he has not complied with the requirement of Fed.R.Civ.P. 37(a) that he certify he has in good faith conferred or attempted to confer in an effort to secure the disclosures without court action.

If the Court nonetheless reaches the merits of Harris's motion, it should be denied because Plaintiff had no obligation to make Rule 26(a) disclosures in light of the entry of default. See Porter v. Brancato, No. Civ. A. 96-2208-KHV, 1997 WL 150050, at *1 (D. Kan. Feb. 24, 1997).


CONCLUSION
For the reasons discussed above, Plaintiff asks that the Court deny Defendant Harris's Verified Motion to Compel Discovery and Motion for Sanctions for Failing to Disclose.

This 4th day of January, 2008.

Respectfully submitted,

Alana R. Black
Senior Trial Counsel Georgia Bar No. 785045 E-mail: blacka*sec.gov
COUNSEL FOR PLAINTIFF
Securities and Exchange Commission
3475 Lenox Road, N.E., Ste. 500
Atlanta, Georgia 30326-1232
Tel: (404) 842-7600
Fax: (404) 842-7679


Exhibit A

Black, Alana R.
From: Black, Alana R.
Sent: Wednesday, May 09, 2007 9:49 AM
To: Rufus Paul Harris
Cc: Hicks, William P.
Subject: RE: Legal concerns

Mr. Harris,
Thank you for your e-mail. I would be happy to talk with you about the pending case or about the potential deal described in your e-mail.

While I obviously cannot provide you with any legal advice, one big potential danger is that the treasury checks and other materials described in your e-mail could be forged or fraudulent. If so, then I would like to turn over information about them to the appropriate officials.

Please give me a call at 404-842-7678 to discuss. Thanks. Alana Black

Original Message
From: Rufus Paul Harris [mailto:harris*cshd.us] Sent: Wednesday, May 09, 2007 5:02 AM
To: Black, Alana R.
Subject: Legal concerns
Importance: High
Do you have a problem or concern if I, Rufus Paul Harris proceed with the following potential client?
If you have no legal concerns and everything is verified would the SEC be interested in arranging a meeting about possible placement with CSHD?

The Client is holding the following documents:
(1) 2-page Safekeeping Receipt (dated 7 May 2007) which appears to be:
on the letterhead of Federal Reserve Bank of New York;
signatured stamped by the Federal Reserve's Chairman and Vice Chairman
red-ribbon stamped and sealed by the Federal Reserve
holding the following basic data:
U.S. Treasury Check Number(s) in denominations of $500M, totaling $2B;
Custodial Account No.;
Account Name: (matches the Name of One (1) of the Two (2) Members of the Special
Purpose Company Client; and,
Fed Screen Registration Codes: (a) Access, (b) Security & (c) ID Number
(2) 1-page Reserved Funds Letter (dated 7 May 2007) which appears to be:
(a) on the letterhead of Federal Reserve Bank of New York;
(b) signatured stamped by the Federal Reserve's Chairman and Vice Chairman
(c) red-ribbon stamped and sealed by the Federal Reserve
(d) addressed to the Special Purpose Company Client;
(e) holding the following basic data:
U.S. Treasury Check Number(s) in denominations of 4$500M, totaling $2B; and,
Custodial Account No.;
(f) confirming the following:

(1) said $2B U.S. Treasury Checks have been reserved for up to Three (3) Years; and,
(2) said Checks may be verified by "responsible bank inquiry".
(3) 2-page Statement of Authority (dated 7 May 2007) which appears to be:
on the letterhead of Federal Reserve Bank of New York;
signatured stamped by the Federal Reserve's Chairman and Vice Chairman
red-ribbon stamped and sealed by the Federal Reserve
addressed to the Special Purpose Company Client;
confirming the following:
U.S. Treasury Check Number(s) in denominations of $500M, totaling $2B;
Custodial Account No.;
that the Special Purpose Company has FULL signatory/authority over said Checks;
that said Checks are free and clear of any taxes, levies or duties....
that the account of the Special Purpose Company may be verified by "responsible bank inquiry" and confirmed by "Grey Screen" ONLY to the institution designated by the Special Purpose Company;
that the Federal Reserve performed ALL political, economic and financial due diligence and affirm, "with full bank authority" thall ALL laws have bee complied with good, clean. cleared funds of non-criminal origin and legally earned....
that ANY copy of said instrument/Statement of Authority will be valid and legal as the original, which was issued in "full faith and trust" of the Federal Reserve Bank of New York.
(4) 1-page Confidential Memo (dated 7 May 2007) which appears to be:
on the letterhead of Federal Reserve Bank of New York;
signatured stamped by the Federal Reserve's Chairman and Vice Chairman
red-ribbon stamped and sealed by the Federal Reserve
holding the following data:

(1) U.S. Treasury Check Number(s) in denominations of

Name of the Special Purpose Company; and, "Screening Procedures":
(a) Access Code: <>
(b) Security Code: <>
(c) Related Code: <>
(d) Net Code: <>
(e) Additional Access Code: <>
CUSIP:
SWIFT Code: <>
Screening Code: <>
ISIN:
Command Code: <>
DTC:
UWRTR:
(f) Follow Screen Instructions as
(1) Option 1: (for reserving/blocking

of the "specific" instrument;
Option 2:
Option 3:
(g) If any of the above Options is NOT selected, the "specific" instrument will go off
screen.
Rufus Paul Harris

CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE

I hereby certify that on this 4th day of January, 2008, I mailed by United States Postal Service the preceding BRIEF IN OPPOSITION TO DEFENDANT HARRIS'S MOTION TO COMPEL DISCOVERY AND FOR SANCTIONS FOR FAILING TO DISCLOSE to the following non-CM/ECF participants:

Rufus Paul Harris a/k/a Paul Rufus Harris
383 Clear Creek Road,
N.W.Adairsville,
Georgia 30103-5934

Conversion Solutions Holdings Corporation
c/o Registered Agent
Harvard Business Services
16192 Coastal Highway
Lewes, DE 19958


Alana R. Black
Counsel for Plaintiff
Georgia Bar No. 785045
U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission
Atlanta District Office
3475 Lenox Road, N. E., Suite 1000
Atlanta, Georgia 30326-1232
Tel. No. (404) 842-7678
blacka*sec.gov


no exhibits were available where i found this..
 
Posted by glassman on :
 
it sounds alot like what source was saying.

trial law doesn't care who the victims are,,

HOWEVER.

there are other parties involved here, and the judge oughta tell the plaintiff that in so many words.
 
Posted by T e x on :
 
????

not following you...
 
Posted by dinner42 on :
 
Greetings Tex and All, good to see the battle continues over here


Happy New Year

D42
 
Posted by thesource on :
 
shakes head and walks back out of the room ....
 
Posted by glassman on :
 
LOL, source, never said you were wrong. just didn't agree with the presentation.

we have to assume the judge will follow procedure.

we'll wait and see...
 
Posted by Ocqueoc on :
 
The question I would really like an answer to is,
Why did the SEC allow cshd to keep "trading" after the 10 day halt?
Rufus asked for it to be halted.If The SEC thought this was all 'FRAUD" WHY, OH WHY, is it still "trading"??????

AND

Where is their proof of the "dump"?
Are we as shareholders allowed answer's to these questions?
 
Posted by glassman on :
 
they are only allowed to halt if for 10 days.. it's the rules..

after that an MM has to refile to sponsor a co.

no MM has done that so it trades on the greys...

there is a company that has been halted by the DTCC for about two years. the symbol is BCIT...

the DTCC refuse to allow trades to clear on it because somebody sold counterfeit shares thru a broker, and then it appears somebody shorted it.

the whole thing is a mess....
 
Posted by Igor R on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by glassman:


the DTCC refuse to allow trades to clear on it because somebody sold counterfeit shares thru a broker, and then it appears somebody shorted it.

the whole thing is a mess....

Isn't that what pretty much happened with CSHD?
 
Posted by glassman on :
 
nope, it trades on the grey sheets every day, the trades may or may not be clearing i dunno...

BCIT? they have had trades on about three different days since Sep 20005.

the comapny even sued the "shareholders" to determine who had what shares and where they bought them...

the case was dismissed before discovery was completed...
 
Posted by glassman on :
 
BCIT:

http://secfilings.nasdaq.com/filingFrameset.asp?FileName=0001144204%2D07%2D06727 7%2Etxt&FilePath=%5C2007%5C12%5C13%5C&CoName=BANCORP+INTERNATIONAL+GROUP%2C+INC% 2E&FormType=10QSB&RcvdDate=12%2F13%2F2007&pdf=

Item 1. Legal Proceedings.

Pino Litigation

In August 2005, management became aware of the unauthorized issuance of approximately 243,842,000 shares of our common stock (the “Wrongfully Issued Shares”) to various entities and individuals for services and gifts, whereupon these entities and individuals attempted to sell the Wrongfully Issued Shares in the open market. Our current officers and directors had no relationship with the entities and individuals that issued the Wrongfully Issued Shares.

In September 2005, we filed a civil action (the “Pino Litigation”) in the District Court of Oklahoma County, Oklahoma, styled Bancorp International Group, Inc. v. Mario A. Pino, an individual, Sam Deeb, an individual, Jean Carlos Medina, an individual, Charles Weller, an individual, Barkev Kibarian, an individual, Felica Morales, an individual, Clearstock, Inc., a Texas corporation, DealFlo, L.L.C., a New York Limited Liability Company, The Grace Trust, a foreign trust, Global Consulting Group, a Maryland corporation, Intelligent Message Distributors, a Nevada corporation, and Wall Street Group, L.L.C., a Arizona limited liability company (the “Defendants”), Case No. CJ-2005-7459 (the “Civil Litigation”), seeking the return of the Wrongfully Issued Shares and the Defendants’ receipt of proceeds from the sale of those shares.

In the Civil Litigation we alleged that Mr. Pino individually and through various affiliated entities and co-conspirators, including the Wall Street Group, L.L.C., prepared or possessed 20 or more common stock certificates purportedly representing 235,000,000 shares of our common stock, the previously referred to Wrongfully Issued Shares, that were distributed to various individuals and entities, including the other Defendants. We could not determine if, in addition to the 235,000,000 shares, any additional shares were wrongfully issued.


it just gets worse from there....

the company is actively trying to resolve the issue and get trading again...
 
Posted by milliam on :
 
Either way, the SEC sure doesn't seem to want this case to go to court. I can sure understand their stance, but if their case is so good, why not just let RPH have his day. Before you say it...I know they don't have to due to the default.

I guess I'm not a neutral party here due to my CSHD holdings.
 
Posted by Igor R on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by glassman:
nope, it trades on the grey sheets every day, the trades may or may not be clearing i dunno...

BCIT? they have had trades on about three different days since Sep 20005.

the comapny even sued the "shareholders" to determine who had what shares and where they bought them...

the case was dismissed before discovery was completed...

I was talking about the fact there were illegal shares sold through brokers, and they were shorted.
 
Posted by glassman on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by Igor R:
quote:
Originally posted by glassman:
nope, it trades on the grey sheets every day, the trades may or may not be clearing i dunno...

BCIT? they have had trades on about three different days since Sep 20005.

the comapny even sued the "shareholders" to determine who had what shares and where they bought them...

the case was dismissed before discovery was completed...

I was talking about the fact there were illegal shares sold through brokers, and they were shorted.
one of the reasons i got into this one was because i saw what you are claiming. it appears to me to be true...

about the time it first hit 1.40$ the short became so obvious it was like a lighthouse. the squeeze was forced by retail demand, and possibly an even much bigger short player who wanted to get it to 3$ to begin shorting from there...
this play was magnificent in it's insanity...

the SEC getting involved SO FAST just makes the play even more insane. they may have set a record for acting quickly on this one, which just makes me even more skeptical than i already am.


just about that time ( the first 1.50$) the webTV people got ahold of it along with sourstreet and stockfruit... they represented a major short interest that got burned badly, when it ran to 3$. that just fed more fuel to the "online war" that was waged all over the internet...

somebody should make this into a movie, showing dozens of boiler room typist all over the country ar war with each other...

the question of legal and illegal shorting is very blurry. for along time i believed that shorting pennies is illegal etc.

what i have come to conclude as result of this and a couple other plays that i have followed very closely for a long time is that shorting isn't illegal even in NAKED form.

it is an affront to our sensibilities, and it should be illegal, but it is just plain not illegal..

an SEC lawyer has recently been quoted in court saying if it (NS) is to be stopped? congress will have to act. that's pretty clear....

it's not illegal.

the brokers own the DTCC...

the DTCC is simply keeping a tally.
the brokers are ultimately responsible, and they allow big customers to do as they please...

the term SRO applies here.. self regulating organisations..

that is IMO the biggest reason that Social Secutirty cannot be privatised... can you imagine how broke seniors would be if their SS went into to the market every month? then the borkers would all be called to testify before congress.. etc. etc..

the feeding frenzy would make a lion pride on a buffalo look like kindergartners in Catholic School.
 
Posted by T e x on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by milliam:
Either way, the SEC sure doesn't seem to want this case to go to court. I can sure understand their stance, but if their case is so good, why not just let RPH have his day. Before you say it...I know they don't have to due to the default.

I guess I'm not a neutral party here due to my CSHD holdings.

He had "his day" and chose instead to not follow procedure. Of course it's fine with the SEC to get the default: means less man-hours for them. But obviously they have been prepared to go to court--they filed the suit in the first place.
 
Posted by Stockstar69 on :
 
Hey Glass...I'm just reading your post and cracked up out loud. This is Hilarious because of its truthfullness. Maybe the movie name can be...WallStreet 2.5, the R.P.H. Story. R.P.H. can be played by Tom Hanks.

quote:
Originally posted by glassman:
quote:
Originally posted by Igor R:
quote:
Originally posted by glassman:
nope, it trades on the grey sheets every day, the trades may or may not be clearing i dunno...

BCIT? they have had trades on about three different days since Sep 20005.

the comapny even sued the "shareholders" to determine who had what shares and where they bought them...

the case was dismissed before discovery was completed...

I was talking about the fact there were illegal shares sold through brokers, and they were shorted.
one of the reasons i got into this one was because i saw what you are claiming. it appears to me to be true...

about the time it first hit 1.40$ the short became so obvious it was like a lighthouse. the squeeze was forced by retail demand, and possibly an even much bigger short player who wanted to get it to 3$ to begin shorting from there...
this play was magnificent in it's insanity...

the SEC getting involved SO FAST just makes the play even more insane. they may have set a record for acting quickly on this one, which just makes me even more skeptical than i already am.


just about that time ( the first 1.50$) the webTV people got ahold of it along with sourstreet and stockfruit... they represented a major short interest that got burned badly, when it ran to 3$. that just fed more fuel to the "online war" that was waged all over the internet...

somebody should make this into a movie, showing dozens of boiler room typist all over the country ar war with each other...

the question of legal and illegal shorting is very blurry. for along time i believed that shorting pennies is illegal etc.

what i have come to conclude as result of this and a couple other plays that i have followed very closely for a long time is that shorting isn't illegal even in NAKED form.

it is an affront to our sensibilities, and it should be illegal, but it is just plain not illegal..

an SEC lawyer has recently been quoted in court saying if it (NS) is to be stopped? congress will have to act. that's pretty clear....

it's not illegal.

the brokers own the DTCC...

the DTCC is simply keeping a tally.
the brokers are ultimately responsible, and they allow big customers to do as they please...

the term SRO applies here.. self regulating organisations..

that is IMO the biggest reason that Social Secutirty cannot be privatised... can you imagine how broke seniors would be if their SS went into to the market every month? then the borkers would all be called to testify before congress.. etc. etc..

the feeding frenzy would make a lion pride on a buffalo look like kindergartners in Catholic School.


 
Posted by milliam on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by T e x:
He had "his day" and chose instead to not follow procedure. Of course it's fine with the SEC to get the default: means less man-hours for them. But obviously they have been prepared to go to court--they filed the suit in the first place.

I agree that RPH missed out on his official day in court, but the reasons behind some of that stuff is kind of muddy to me. There's no doubt he should have obtained legal counsel, but oh well.

As for the SEC being prepared to go to court...I don't agree with this at all. Sure they were ready to take RPH and CSHD to court, but they didn't have any evidence and were pretty much specualting their case..thus not really prepared. I was there in the court room and over-heard Hicks talking with Alana, his exact words were "We're going to find something".
 
Posted by glassman on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by Stockstar69:
Hey Glass...I'm just reading your post and cracked up out loud. This is Hilarious because of its truthfullness. Maybe the movie name can be...WallStreet 2.5, the R.P.H. Story. R.P.H. can be played by Tom Hanks.


in spite of what some people say to me and about me i've always tried post my honest opinions.
some people may not want to hear the blunt truth at times is the only reason i prevaricate at all...

i played the short squeeze from 1$ to just under three and bailed... that was enough drama for one year IMO. [Big Grin]
 
Posted by Stockstar69 on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by milliam:
quote:
Originally posted by T e x:
He had "his day" and chose instead to not follow procedure. Of course it's fine with the SEC to get the default: means less man-hours for them. But obviously they have been prepared to go to court--they filed the suit in the first place.

I agree that RPH missed out on his official day in court, but the reasons behind some of that stuff is kind of muddy to me. There's no doubt he should have obtained legal counsel, but oh well.

As for the SEC being prepared to go to court...I don't agree with this at all. Sure they were ready to take RPH and CSHD to court, but they didn't have any evidence and were pretty much specualting their case..thus not really prepared. I was there in the court room and over-heard Hicks talking with Alana, his exact words were "We're going to find something".

Hmmm, that's interesting. When were they going to find something? Sounds like old RPH may have done the right thing since nothing was found???

The plot thickens. [Eek!]
 
Posted by T e x on :
 
Ya, they found nothing, all right: lol, no assets, no merger, no CEO, no BOD, no 6:1 divvy...despite the PRs to the contrary.
 
Posted by Ocqueoc on :
 
Tex, you forgot to add, IMO
According to Gee's depo , which can be taken as true or not because he seemed to have changed stories often, there was "bonds" available.

I see the sec did in fact depo M.A.
Was it legal what he did with his "gifted" shares? I am by no means an expert, but that whole part sure sounds fishy to me. That is why I'd like to see where the "dump" was that the sec claims "Was one of the biggest pump and dump in history" or words to that effect.
I can remember when this whole halt mess started and several on here said we would never hear about the investigation. Well I think IF the shareholders are telling the truth about talking to sec officers., we heard more than we should have IMO.

Glassman, thank you for your answers. As usual, in layman terms for us that don't understand and to the point.

"As the Stomach Turns "is still turning.
 
Posted by T e x on :
 
well, then...where are they? If they had one-tenth what was claimed, the company could've been doing deals all along, suspension or no suspension, greys or no greys. Instead all we get is Circus McGurkus, plots-within-plots, it-was-designed-all-along-to-expose-nekkid-shorts.

As far as Gee goes, why trust him? or any of the whole crew, for that matter?
 
Posted by Ocqueoc on :
 
Tex,
I don't trust Gee any farther than I can throw him. This whole thing just makes me go hhmmmmm
LOL
 
Posted by T e x on :
 
lol, understood
 
Posted by Ace of Spades on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by T e x:
well, then...where are they? If they had one-tenth what was claimed, the company could've been doing deals all along, suspension or no suspension, greys or no greys. Instead all we get is Circus McGurkus, plots-within-plots, it-was-designed-all-along-to-expose-nekkid-shorts.

As far as Gee goes, why trust him? or any of the whole crew, for that matter?

Circus Mcgirkus.....plots-within-plots....Hmmmmmmm....you should be a rapper!!! [Big Grin]

I'll write your first single [Big Grin]

I'm tex from Tex....Ass
I eat Mc's up like I'm a T-rex...b#tch

I keep it real, You wanna play games
go play Tet.....tris

...over the beat to this song


http://youtube.com/watch?v=lC3sI-Lrmhg [Wink]

LoL [Eek!]

.....TEX shaking his head at Ace of Spades [Roll Eyes]
 
Posted by T e x on :
 
quote:
the SEC getting involved SO FAST just makes the play even more insane. they may have set a record for acting quickly on this one, which just makes me even more skeptical than i already am.
lol...puh-leeze
 
Posted by milliam on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by T e x:
Ya, they found nothing, all right: lol, no assets, no merger, no CEO, no BOD, no 6:1 divvy...despite the PRs to the contrary.

I guess I should have put that in context a bit better. Hicks and Alana were talking with 2 of the colleagues about the case. They were all trying to figure out what was going on. The main talk was pump and dump. They were pretty much saying that they hadn't found anything yet, but that they would. Interesting enough, they talked about MA's wife when they were talking about finding the share dump. The comment there was "Mike Alexander's wife has a lot of shares".
 
Posted by Stockstar69 on :
 
Keep talking...it's getting better all the time.

Freeking Hilarious!
 
Posted by Ocqueoc on :
 
Milliam,
I remember you talking about your visit right after you were there. M.A.'s shares are at the top of my list of guestions!!!!
 
Posted by T e x on :
 
some lazy Sunday afternoon...go through the filings and add up MA's sales.
 
Posted by TimW on :
 
This almost made it to page 2.... What are ya'll thinking!?

Bump!
 
Posted by Ocqueoc on :
 
Sorry to all you Dallas fans [Frown]
It was a nerve wracking game, kind of reminded me of the lions.
 
Posted by T e x on :
 
quote:
An investigation by The Sun News shows the local condos and those in other states are the latest venture for Woods, who is connected to a web of shell corporations with dubious finances and counts penny-stock promoter Rufus Paul Harris among his business partners.

Harris, of Adairsville, Ga., helped Woods form Atlewa Trust, the company that was supposed to finance Crystal Palace and Bahama Island. Harris is being sued by the Securities and Exchange Commission over an alleged pump-and-dump stock scheme he orchestrated.


http://www.myrtlebeachonline.com/news/local/story/312794.html
 
Posted by Mr. CATIAEngineer on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by T e x:
quote:
An investigation by The Sun News shows the local condos and those in other states are the latest venture for Woods, who is connected to a web of shell corporations with dubious finances and counts penny-stock promoter Rufus Paul Harris among his business partners.

Harris, of Adairsville, Ga., helped Woods form Atlewa Trust, the company that was supposed to finance Crystal Palace and Bahama Island. Harris is being sued by the Securities and Exchange Commission over an alleged pump-and-dump stock scheme he orchestrated.


http://www.myrtlebeachonline.com/news/local/story/312794.html
Thats an interesting portion of the article that you decided to post. There were other points of interest IMO. Such as.....

"Harris told The Sun News in October that he and Woods had a falling out in the months after Atlewa was formed and that Woods left Waatle to do business on his own using the Atlewa name."

The article was meant to highlight Duwayne Woods but it appears to me that it targeted Mr Harris more than anyone else. It doesnt seem odd that in the section titled "Woods' background" there is very little written about Woods but all sorts of info about Harris and BBAN (was Woods even involved with BBAN?).

IMO that article was written to further discredit Mr Harris by using the Duwayne Woods stuff as a means to write it. Someone obviously screwed up with the Crystal Palace condo project but at the end of the article it says that law enforcement has declined to investigate any possible criminal activity that might have taken place so the article carries no weight IMO.
 
Posted by T e x on :
 
I simply quoted something toward the top that mentions Harris so peeps could get an idea about the article, rather than merely posting a link. I seriously doubt the Myrtle Beach reporter knows much if anything about the CSHD mess... As I recall this is at least the second article on the real estate deal.
 
Posted by Mr. CATIAEngineer on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by T e x:
I simply quoted something toward the top that mentions Harris so peeps could get an idea about the article, rather than merely posting a link. I seriously doubt the Myrtle Beach reporter knows much if anything about the CSHD mess... As I recall this is at least the second article on the real estate deal.

No worries, I didnt mean to come off so aggressive [Smile]

However, I disagree. I think that reporter knows a great deal about the CSHD mess....I just wonder who is feeding him with the info.

This part is fairly detailed IMO.

"The cowboy hat-wearing Harris, whose colorful image included business meetings at Hooters restaurants, had a devout following among penny-stock pickers on Internet discussion boards.

Harris and other Conversion Solutions executives used those discussion boards and news releases to tout a wild array of assets, including nearly $8 billion in foreign bonds and the rights to harvest all of the logs at the bottom of the Amazon River and its tributaries."

He is obviously being fed some info. However, is the comment about "the rights to harvest all of the logs at the bottom of the Amazon River and its tributaries." a bit off base? I believe those were Mike Alexanders claims.

I just personally have a problem with how the article was written. It was meant to be about the Condo project but IMO spent too much time on Rufus, CSHD and BBAN. Maybe its just me. [Smile]
 
Posted by Ocqueoc on :
 
Someone had to "feed" that info to the reporter IMO

Hooters? Like that would be well known HHmmmm
 
Posted by T e x on :
 
quote:
However, is the comment about "the rights to harvest all of the logs at the bottom of the Amazon River and its tributaries." a bit off base? I believe those were Mike Alexanders claims.

not really...seems like I remember them both pumping the log deal in July '06, then later when MA took another stab at it, he was gonna put "the assets" into CSHD holdings for "management."
 
Posted by glassman on :
 
i suspect the writer is just really into investigative journalism cat..

see this?

Major Awards:
2007

* 2007 Taylor-Tomlin Award for Investigative Journalism
* Investigative reporter David Wren for his Five River Series


http://www.mcclatchy.com/146/story/361.html

he's their prime major award winner...

i didn't bother to look up how prestigious the Taylor-Tomlin Award for Investigative Journalism isn't ....
 
Posted by T e x on :
 
mcclatchy...that's who bought the Knight Ridder papers, including the Star-Telegram.
 
Posted by Mr. CATIAEngineer on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by T e x:
quote:
However, is the comment about "the rights to harvest all of the logs at the bottom of the Amazon River and its tributaries." a bit off base? I believe those were Mike Alexanders claims.

not really...seems like I remember them both pumping the log deal in July '06, then later when MA took another stab at it, he was gonna put "the assets" into CSHD holdings for "management."
I spoke to Rufus myself and he said the log deal wasnt what they hoped for. He later said it on SPR I believe.

I do recall the second part of your post though. I have my thoughts about that but ill keep my koolaid style opinions to myself [Smile]
 
Posted by T e x on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by Mr. CATIAEngineer:
quote:
Originally posted by T e x:
quote:
However, is the comment about "the rights to harvest all of the logs at the bottom of the Amazon River and its tributaries." a bit off base? I believe those were Mike Alexanders claims.

not really...seems like I remember them both pumping the log deal in July '06, then later when MA took another stab at it, he was gonna put "the assets" into CSHD holdings for "management."
I spoke to Rufus myself and he said the log deal wasnt what they hoped for. He later said it on SPR I believe.

I do recall the second part of your post though. I have my thoughts about that but ill keep my koolaid style opinions to myself [Smile]

quote:
ROCKWALL, TX, Jul 13, 2006 (MARKET WIRE via COMTEX) -- The FrontHaul Group (OTCBB: FHAL) has gone through a recent transformation and Market News first would like to invite you to join us in welcoming Rufus Paul Harris the new CEO of this company for an Live Exclusive Discussion.
The FrontHaul Group is a publicly held Delaware corporation with branch offices in Rockwall, TX. The FrontHaul Group expects to grow their business specifically in the areas of 3rd party logistics, which includes but is not limited too Transportation Brokerage and Motor Carrier services.

The Company has recently signed a letter of intent with CEOTA and The Brazilian Government to have the exclusive rights in removing the sunken logs from the Amazon River.

Join Rufus Paul Harris, CEO FrontHaul Group, Mike the Analyst, and Dick Hunter today at 9:45 a.m. CDT on ***.com.

http://www.allstocks.com/stockmessageboard/ubb/ultimatebb.php/ubb/get_topic/f/8/ t/022582/p/33.html
 
Posted by Mr. CATIAEngineer on :
 
Yea, I talked to him after the July 13th interview. Im not saying that Rufus wasnt left with the log LOI....im just saying he said it wasnt what they expected.

Keep in mind that Mike tried to take that log deal with him over to ANLT.

In any case, I think we can all agree that CEOTA was a scam anyway. Id like to hear what Rufus would have to say about Gordon Brown / CEOTA today.
 
Posted by Stockstar69 on :
 
Actually, if FHAL/CSHD signed an agreement with Brazil, couldn't that agreement have been used as collateral for the billions in bonds? I think so.
 
Posted by Mr. CATIAEngineer on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by Stockstar69:
Actually, if FHAL/CSHD signed an agreement with Brazil, couldn't that agreement have been used as collateral for the billions in bonds? I think so.

Maybe....but CEOTA (Climate Exchange of the Americas) turned out to be bogus so its hard for me to believe anything about log deals these days.

This reminds me. Does anyone happen to have the M N 1 interview when Mike Alexander and a man going by the name Gordon Brown (from CEOTA) discussed the log deal? Im pretty sure there were two interviews, one with just the Fronthaul guys and another with that Gordon Brown representing CEOTA. I cant seem to find the one with Gordon.
 
Posted by Free Muney on :
 
why is this still a thread? not being an a$$ just curious.
 
Posted by Mr. CATIAEngineer on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by Free Muney:
why is this still a thread? not being an a$$ just curious.

Because the SEC has not finished with their "discovery" so the case is still active IMO.
 
Posted by Igor R on :
 
Interestingly enough MA has started posting on HSM.
 
Posted by Mr. CATIAEngineer on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by Igor R:
Interestingly enough MA has started posting on HSM.

Yup, some good ones too........

Someone asked him who he "gifted" his shares to. His answer.

--------------------------

bodi
HSM Enthusiast

Join Date: Jul 2006
Posts: 609

hey all, gave shares to friends and relatives so I didn't have to make anymore decisions here...I considered breaking them down to the existing shreholders but you guys were jerks to me.

and

bodi
HSM Enthusiast

Join Date: Jul 2006
Posts: 609

and jerks to DP and James Gee and all the people I cared about....trying to help this company...I even tried to give them to RPH so he could hypothecate on them...

and then.........

bodi
HSM Enthusiast

Join Date: Jul 2006
Posts: 609

k finally, sry I have a slow connection...I have never called rufus a crook...I don't agree with all the ways he treated me but whatever...I'm a big boy...

The first and only document I signed was in rufus' horse bard he was leasing. Later when I pointed out the preferred shares he came to texas and offered himself a way out of the ceo...ship his coincern was the SEC without cause was going to put the company in receivership...I agreeed. So we exercised my 500,000 preferred shares which is 50 mill common and I took the company back over to stop the SEC from piutting us in receivership...I tried to sell a bond that I found I didn't have the right to sell and figured I am way out of my league...rufus please take this back because I dont know **** about this ....With honor he did....then the SHC with JA and James Gee decided they could run the company better without rufus due to the fact the felt his focus had been lost...I proxied my voting to James Gee. and they used the vote to remove Rufus again....several weeks later I suggest to JG to let rufus have it back as he seem to be the only one with the complete knowledge to get this company moving forward...that never happened...the SEC shut us down for lack of proper financial and counsel...btw that cost me 7500 USD cause of the piece of **** attorneys office in atlanta that refuses to pay me back...So when the SEC shut us down I lost about 150,000,000 go figure

----------------------------

Sorry, not trying to spam the board. But....for Mike to suddenly pop up out of no where posting things like this seemed somewhat relevant. There is more at H S M if anyone is interested.
 
Posted by Mr. CATIAEngineer on :
 
Update : Some questions we asked of Bodi to determine for certain that it is MA. Apparently he answered incorrectly.....currently its suspect whether or not thats really MA posting under Bodi's screen name.
 
Posted by thecon00 on :
 
Hi CAT:

yeah i think Ceota was the only part of the trail which you and i concluded with absolute certainty was a fraud. i got two responses from them asking for money and when i requested info i got a canned response twice. I always thought it curious that this was the part of the deal that MA was bringing to the table. Unfortunately it hooked RPH as well. CAT if u and i had come to our conclusions on Ceota sooner i might have gotten more of my shares out between $3 and $4. oh well.

What are u trading now and how is it going?

Ive doubled up in 07 on UVE and expect it to get to $10-13 whenever the market comes back. Im in at $3and change so not too worried plus her fundamentals are way to strong. If u get some I don’t recommend holding through Florida’s hurricane season. Playing w fire. - CON
 
Posted by new2stocks on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by Mr. CATIAEngineer:
Update : Some questions we asked of Bodi to determine for certain that it is MA. Apparently he answered incorrectly.....currently its suspect whether or not thats really MA posting under Bodi's screen name.

[Roll Eyes] [Good Luck]
 
Posted by wallymac on :
 
Don't waste time looking for the *** interview that included Gordon Brown. I remember it well because I bought just prior to the interview and almost sold right afterward. Nothing of substance came out of it, except for lies. They said they couldn't get anything signed because of the World Cup Soccer going on at the time. I remember them saying that the country was like on a 3 day siesta, which pissed me off. I'm half Latino and hate the stereotypes. One thing that Gordon did say was that the contracts were done except for the signing.

Also Mike and I think Randy were laughing and saying that they couldn't say much but that something big was coming down. It was shortly after that we found out about the merger.

As far as Bodi being Mike? I believe that it was confirmed at one time on PalTalk but I wasn't there so it would be second hand info. His saying he gifted shares to many different individuals makes sense, since no one has ever filed showing ownership of 10% or 5% which I believe would have been necessary. Hey and what better way of hiding than spreading them out.

At this point it really doesn't matter since the shareholders are the ones that got screwed. Hopefully the 3 letter agencies do their jobs and get to the bottom of this.

I've put this on the back burner of the house 3 blocks away so it doesn't interfere with my trading. It's more of wanting to read the end of a very long novel that half way through I knew would not have a good ending but keep reading anyway.

I wish all good luck here.

A few stocks to look into that night do well IF and WHEN the markets rebound. Not saying to buy just look at, do the DD and then decide.

UBET
PWPY
SIRI if the merger goes through but nice and low now
SPKL
PTSC but probably around April 15th

Remember do your own DD, Don't blame me if they tank and don't give me any credit if they make money. It's up to you to decide whether to press the button or not so all the credit goes to you.

GLTA
Wally
 
Posted by Mr. CATIAEngineer on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by new2stocks:
quote:
Originally posted by Mr. CATIAEngineer:
Update : Some questions we asked of Bodi to determine for certain that it is MA. Apparently he answered incorrectly.....currently its suspect whether or not thats really MA posting under Bodi's screen name.

[Roll Eyes] [Good Luck]
Uhhh....what? Good luck with what?

Its my understanding that Bodi was asked a question that only MA would know and the answer to and Bodi answered incorrectly. If you disagree with me thats fine but take notice that I used the words "apparently" and suspect".

What is your opinion on the subject?
 
Posted by Mr. CATIAEngineer on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by thecon00:
Hi CAT:

yeah i think Ceota was the only part of the trail which you and i concluded with absolute certainty was a fraud. i got two responses from them asking for money and when i requested info i got a canned response twice. I always thought it curious that this was the part of the deal that MA was bringing to the table. Unfortunately it hooked RPH as well. CAT if u and i had come to our conclusions on Ceota sooner i might have gotten more of my shares out between $3 and $4. oh well.

What are u trading now and how is it going?

Ive doubled up in 07 on UVE and expect it to get to $10-13 whenever the market comes back. Im in at $3and change so not too worried plus her fundamentals are way to strong. If u get some I don’t recommend holding through Florida’s hurricane season. Playing w fire. - CON

Ive basically frozen my account. I started all of this June of 06 and to be honest it all sort of stinks to me. Quite honestly if I didnt have a dime invested in this company id still follow it a little because it has been a strong learning experience in a lot of ways.

Anyway, as far as CEOTA goes...it was obvious that they were bogus earlier enough for me to get out. It was also pretty obvious that Fronthaul was dealing with toxic financing very early. To be honest, thats oddly part of what kept he hanging on. It has always appeared that CVSU came along to nail some people that deserve to be nailed so I chose to stick around for the duration.
 
Posted by Mr. CATIAEngineer on :
 
Wally, I agree that Bodi was confirmed to be MA long ago. I was commenting that it wasnt believed to be MA posting as Bodi that particular day. All rumor and speculation of course.

Oh, and I remember the situation with the contracts in Brazil. It was during the World Cup. That was the excuse, they said that even the government shuts down to watch it.

edit : duh you said World Cup. "Yea, what he said"

[BadOne]
 
Posted by wallymac on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by Mr. CATIAEngineer:
quote:
Originally posted by thecon00:
Hi CAT:

yeah i think Ceota was the only part of the trail which you and i concluded with absolute certainty was a fraud. i got two responses from them asking for money and when i requested info i got a canned response twice. I always thought it curious that this was the part of the deal that MA was bringing to the table. Unfortunately it hooked RPH as well. CAT if u and i had come to our conclusions on Ceota sooner i might have gotten more of my shares out between $3 and $4. oh well.

What are u trading now and how is it going?

Ive doubled up in 07 on UVE and expect it to get to $10-13 whenever the market comes back. Im in at $3and change so not too worried plus her fundamentals are way to strong. If u get some I don’t recommend holding through Florida’s hurricane season. Playing w fire. - CON

Ive basically frozen my account. I started all of this June of 06 and to be honest it all sort of stinks to me. Quite honestly if I didnt have a dime invested in this company id still follow it a little because it has been a strong learning experience in a lot of ways.

Anyway, as far as CEOTA goes...it was obvious that they were bogus earlier enough for me to get out. It was also pretty obvious that Fronthaul was dealing with toxic financing very early. To be honest, thats oddly part of what kept he hanging on. It has always appeared that CVSU came along to nail some people that deserve to be nailed so I chose to stick around for the duration.

I felt the same about the Logging deal and was ready to get out, the merger with CVSU is what not only kept me in but got me to involve family members. Heck, if I had been savvy enough maybe Rufus stating that the logging deal wasn't what they expected would have been the red flag instead of confirmation that he was on the up and up. AH hindsight.

I do have to say that I did make money on CSHD because I sold when the lemon came along and caused the PPS to dip, or should I say crash. I bought back a few thousand shares just in case and still have them. I'm willing to wait until I have to declare them a total loss, if for no other reason than IT MAKES no sens to sell at his point.

GLTA
Wally
 
Posted by trade04 on :
 
story ended a long time ago crazies. keep the shares, scrub the board.
 
Posted by Stockstar69 on :
 
Where are the logs? Where are the logs? Billions in carbon credits. Maybe that was what was in the sealed envelope?

Amazon Deforestation Surging Again - Scientist

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

WASHINGTON - Deforestation of the Amazon has surged in recent months and is likely to rise in 2008 for the first time in four years, a senior Brazilian government scientist said on Wednesday.

The rise raises questions over Brazil's assertion that its environmental policies are effectively protecting the world's biggest rain forest, whose destruction is a major source of carbon emissions that drive global warming.

"I think the last four months is a big concern for the government and now they are sending people to do more law enforcement," Carlos Nobre, a scientist with Brazil's National Institute for Space Research, told a seminar in Washington.

"But I can tell you that it (deforestation) is going to be much higher than 2007."

Nobre, whose government agency monitors the Amazon and gathers data, said that 2,300 square miles (6,000 square km) of forest had been lost in the past four months.

That compares with an estimated 3,700 square miles (9,600 square km) in the 12 months ended July 31, which Brazil officials hailed as the lowest deforestation rate since the 1970s.

Brazil's government has said that policies such as more controls on illegal logging and better certification of land ownership were reducing the deforestation that has destroyed about a fifth of the forest -- an area bigger than France -- since the 1970s.

But environmental groups have warned that rising global commodity prices are likely to fuel more clearing of land for farms, as occurred in 2004 when Brazil recorded the highest deforestation rate of more than 10,400 square miles (27,000 square km ).


LAND USE CHANGES

Nobre said the cause of the recent surge was unclear, but that the major drivers of deforestation such as illegal logging and land clearing for cattle farming remained intact, despite the recent annual declines in forest clearing.

"All those drivers of change are there. The three years of reduced deforestation ... did not bring by themselves a cure for illegal deforestation," he said.

Destruction of forests produces about 20 percent of man-made carbon dioxide emissions, making conservation of the Amazon crucial to limiting rises in global temperatures.

But the government has struggled to stem deforestation, partly due to strong global demand that has made Brazil one of the world's biggest food suppliers. Environmental groups also warn that a rash of planned infrastructure projects in the coming years could bring more settlers to untapped regions.

"Infrastructure is associated with aggressive and progressive land use change," said Nobre, noting that 90 percent of Amazon deforestation occurred within 30 miles (50 km) of roads.

He also warned that continued high world oil prices were likely to result in a surge in demand for Amazon land to produce ethanol, the alternative transport fuel for which global demand is already booming.

"If oil prices keep increasing there will be an explosion of biofuel production in the Amazon, contrary to Brazilian government policy," Nobre said.

(Reporting by Stuart Grudgings; Editing by Cynthia Osterman)


Story by Stuart Grudgings

Story Date: 18/1/2008
 
Posted by Ocqueoc on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by trade04:
story ended a long time ago crazies. keep the shares, scrub the board.

You don;t have to read this board.
The ones that are still interested have a right to be able to. IMO
 
Posted by TimW on :
 
Trade04, I still post here beacuase I had purchased an interest in the company. Despite the current market value, it is still a purchase that is still active.

If you want me to stop posting, ill be happy to sell you my shares so it is now your interest and not mine. Ill move on if i have no shares. Interest in this is probably about $13,000.

Deal?

If not then [Were Down] and keep reading this thread cause its not goin away!!

[Were Up]
 
Posted by T e x on :
 
quote:
Where are the logs? Where are the logs? Billions in carbon credits. Maybe that was what was in the sealed envelope?

sealed envelope?

most plausible idea I've seen was that it was simply private banking account records...ie, privacy restrictions intervened. No DD to back that up, but it seems logical...
 
Posted by fourseven on :
 
Hehe.. it's one of these threads, eh?

I actually found this thread (and few others like it.. DKAM etc) kinda useful.. One of the side goals of my project is to check how discussion forum activity correlates with trading activity .. and a thread like this, going back seventeen years, with people so emotionally involved that they're willing to sit and hold through anything, it's the perfect specimen.

If you plot the volume of messages per day alongside the trading volume on a stock chart, they actually appear somewhat correlated -- higher trading activity (and the price movement that usually accompanies it) is often reflected in higher message activity on the discussion board.

I guess it sorta intuitively makes sense, seeing how the people on the forum are a subset of the general trading population.


But aside from this curious angle, I have to sympathize with Trade04.. this thread keeps coming up to the top of the page over and over again, even though the stock is pretty much worthless. Just waiting for some newb to get roped in..

It would be very cool to have a forum where stock discussions were ordered by how the actual stocks are performing, not how much noise people were making around them. It would be that much easier to see whether you're sticking with a loser of a stock, or riding the new hot wave. Humm.. making that is one of the not-so-side goals of my project.. [Smile]
 
Posted by Mr. CATIAEngineer on :
 
Fourseven,

I dont think anyone here is attempting at "roping in" any newbies. If someone new posts we always give them the advice to stay clear due to an active SEC investigation.

However, I do believe this thread (and the several threads that preceded this one regarding FHAL and CSHD) is a good example of how a message board can influence trading activity of a stock such as this.

Its also very easy to match radio interviews with M N 1 and officers of this company to severe DROPS in pps because of how the interview was handled and comments made by the hosts after the interview was finished. And then there are the analyst sites that claim to be helping traders and investors choose a stock. Some of them seem to pump a stock for a bit followed by the opposite.

I can confidently say that this thread is currently not causing an effect on the volume or pps of this stock. Its a gray sheet stock and if a newbie comes along they should do their own DD to understand what the investigation is about and also what it means to be on the grays.

With all of that said, I am interested in your project. [Smile]
 
Posted by fourseven on :
 
oh, hey, no, i wasn't saying that there's ill intent here.. it's just that newbs tend to rope themselves in without much coercin' .. i know i did [Smile]

so, Catia, you think a message board like that actually has some influence over how a thinly traded (sub)penny stock behaves? there's enough people to start a brush-fire and move the pps with volume? interesting.. i guess it's plausible, when no institutions are trading the stock..

check your PM for more info on my project..
 
Posted by glassman on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by fourseven:

But aside from this curious angle, I have to sympathize with Trade04.. this thread keeps coming up to the top of the page over and over again, even though the stock is pretty much worthless. Just waiting for some newb to get roped in..

i believe exackkkly the opposite.

if anybody gets roped in now they deserve to be separated from their money.

if this isn't a warning thread? i don't know what is.
 
Posted by Mr. CATIAEngineer on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by fourseven:
oh, hey, no, i wasn't saying that there's ill intent here.. it's just that newbs tend to rope themselves in without much coercin' .. i know i did [Smile]

so, Catia, you think a message board like that actually has some influence over how a thinly traded (sub)penny stock behaves? there's enough people to start a brush-fire and move the pps with volume? interesting.. i guess it's plausible, when no institutions are trading the stock..

check your PM for more info on my project..

Yup, I absolutely believe that. Especially if you have a handfull of people with 20k or 30k each on a .02 or so stock. I watched it happen on more than one stock and kept my distance. Not necessarily on this board but its happening on a regular basis IMO.
 
Posted by Ocqueoc on :
 
Hi, ALL
 
Posted by TimW on :
 
Howdy ho!
 
Posted by Ocqueoc on :
 
This thread was almost to the bottom,ya just know we can't have that LOL
 
Posted by Mr. CATIAEngineer on :
 
You just wanted to see why Tim said hi and then called you a ho [Eek!]
 
Posted by a surfer on :
 
lol cat.
 
Posted by Ocqueoc on :
 
[Were Down]
 
Posted by 10of13 on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by Mr. CATIAEngineer:
You just wanted to see why Tim said hi and then called you a ho [Eek!]

[Eek!] [Eek!]
OMG...I haven't been around in quite a while...and I see this...Mr. CAT?!
Stock Momma...how are you...I think you need to ground someone! [Wink]
I see nothing has changed with this stock... [Roll Eyes]
I hope everyone is doing well... [Smile]
 
Posted by Ocqueoc on :
 
10,
HELLO, I think of you everytime I check in here and finally, woo hoo, there you are!!!!!

Hope you and your loved ones are doing good.
[Smile] [Smile] [Smile] [Smile]
 
Posted by Stockstar69 on :
 
News...


Just practicing.
 
Posted by trade04 on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by TimW:
Trade04, I still post here beacuase I had purchased an interest in the company. Despite the current market value, it is still a purchase that is still active.

If you want me to stop posting, ill be happy to sell you my shares so it is now your interest and not mine. Ill move on if i have no shares. Interest in this is probably about $13,000.

Deal?

If not then [Were Down] and keep reading this thread cause its not goin away!!

[Were Up]

ill be happy to be buy EVERYONES shares here if they were to stop posting about cshd indefinately..all together u must have like what? one-two million worth like 3k right now, lol. ok who wants to sell their shares
 
Posted by Mr. CATIAEngineer on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by trade04:
quote:
Originally posted by TimW:
Trade04, I still post here beacuase I had purchased an interest in the company. Despite the current market value, it is still a purchase that is still active.

If you want me to stop posting, ill be happy to sell you my shares so it is now your interest and not mine. Ill move on if i have no shares. Interest in this is probably about $13,000.

Deal?

If not then [Were Down] and keep reading this thread cause its not goin away!!

[Were Up]

ill be happy to be buy EVERYONES shares here if they were to stop posting about cshd indefinately..all together u must have like what? one-two million worth like 3k right now, lol. ok who wants to sell their shares
[BadOne] [Wall Bang]
 
Posted by TimW on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by trade04:
ill be happy to be buy EVERYONES shares here if they were to stop posting about cshd indefinately..all together u must have like what? one-two million worth like 3k right now, lol. ok who wants to sell their shares [/QB]

LoL! I meant buy them at original purchase price [Wink]
 
Posted by trade04 on :
 
[/QUOTE]LoL! I meant buy them at original purchase price [Wink] [/QB][/QUOTE]


why would i or anyone do that, when you can buy them for a tenth of a cent. not that anyone wants to buy this. theres no value here..its done a long time ago. just no1 has delisted the stock (yet)..when they do then youll really get nothing...at least bail out wtih a few hundred ya know..
 
Posted by retiredat49 on :
 
Good job on keeping this thread going trade04!!!
 
Posted by TimW on :
 
Because thats what it would take to make me stop posting here.. Pay me off for what i put into it.

LoL.. I dont care what its worth now, but im going to get my $13,000 in posts, even if its throwing in 2 cents at a time!!!!
 
Posted by Igor R on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by TimW:
Because thats what it would take to make me stop posting here.. Pay me off for what i put into it.

LoL.. I dont care what its worth now, but im going to get my $13,000 in posts, even if its throwing in 2 cents at a time!!!!

You're going to need to post 650,000 times for that to happen. Think we might be dead by that time.
 
Posted by TimW on :
 
LoL, lucky you.
 
Posted by Mr. CATIAEngineer on :
 
This thread isnt going to die until Rufus, the SEC and Judge Cooper are finished filing on Pacer IMO. As long as a papertrail continues to build I think we can expect this thread to be around.

For those that dont like it...why do you click it? There are some real "winners" over at H S M that would love your company. Some of our members already went there when it was apparent that Allstocks doesnt allow the nonsense here that goes on over there. They post rudely over and over, 30-40 times a day about how this company is going nowhere, ever. Rufus must have made them all lose their jobs or something. [Roll Eyes]

This thread is moving at a crawling pace now, I dont understand the need to bash that. Thanks.
 
Posted by Ocqueoc on :
 
Bravo,Mr.C.,Bravo
 
Posted by Stockstar69 on :
 
Just checking in for entertainment purposes at this point. I miss my CSHD family, hope you are all well.
 
Posted by TimW on :
 
-- Filed & Entered: 01/30/2008
Submission to District Judge
 
Posted by Igor R on :
 
Any further details?
 
Posted by T e x on :
 
lol
 
Posted by wallymac on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by Igor R:
Any further details?

YEP. Nothing further to report. OOPS, but I do miss the people I have grown to know through CSHD.

My time has become more limited but still think of you all on a regular basis. Hope you all are doing well.

Wally
 
Posted by Stockstar69 on :
 
Hey, buy the crap out of it now, it's ,0001 and sell it at .0002 (or maybe even .001 if that's a fat finger trade).

LOL sort of. [Wall Bang]
 
Posted by TimW on :
 
No the pacer website didnt have a document or any details.. just showed what i posted.
 
Posted by Ocqueoc on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by wallymac:
quote:
Originally posted by Igor R:
Any further details?

YEP. Nothing further to report. OOPS, but I do miss the people I have grown to know through CSHD.

My time has become more limited but still think of you all on a regular basis. Hope you all are doing well.

Wally

Ahh,
That was nice to hear! I hope you are doing good.
I miss chatting with most of ya [Smile]
 
Posted by Mr. CATIAEngineer on :
 
Weeeeee....my posts are being taken to H S M now. Im finally famous! [Smile]

Thanks Dirtdigger....you saved me the trouble of signing up for that crooked board! Even the hotheaded MOD that should have banned himself long ago commented on my post. Ya'all are running out of good material it seems, how unfortunate. [Wink]

Anyway, still waiting to see whats in the latest pacer doc. It appears to have hit the Judges desk over a week ago. I thought the doc went into Pacer regardless of what the Judge thought of it....correct? No big rush there Judge Cooper, just a few lives youre holding in the balance. [BadOne]
 
Posted by notever on :
 
Hey, Mr. C
Give Judge Cooper a break! He's retired, and it's hard to fit in any work between all those rounds of golf. Working on his backswing obviously is more important than this case!
 
Posted by NEL on :
 
up 900% we're rich!
 
Posted by Ocqueoc on :
 
Congrats mr.c, they must be really bored!!!!
 
Posted by Mr. CATIAEngineer on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by notever:
Hey, Mr. C
Give Judge Cooper a break! He's retired, and it's hard to fit in any work between all those rounds of golf. Working on his backswing obviously is more important than this case!

[Were Up]
 
Posted by new2stocks on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by Mr. CATIAEngineer:
Weeeeee....my posts are being taken to H S M now. Im finally famous! [Smile]

Thanks Dirtdigger....you saved me the trouble of signing up for that crooked board! Even the hotheaded MOD that should have banned himself long ago commented on my post. Ya'all are running out of good material it seems, how unfortunate. [Wink]

Anyway, still waiting to see whats in the latest pacer doc. It appears to have hit the Judges desk over a week ago. I thought the doc went into Pacer regardless of what the Judge thought of it....correct? No big rush there Judge Cooper, just a few lives youre holding in the balance. [BadOne]

Sure no problem, we got a good laugh out of your post! Most of us have moved on and accepted the fact that Rufus is a scammer. I hope someday you will too. I stick around for the humor, always a good laugh reading Rufus' posts as well as yours.

GLTY!
[Big Grin]
 
Posted by Ocqueoc on :
 
LOL, most have moved on at hsm LOL

WTH would you guys do without cshd? Besides playing poker? That is funny , moved on LOL LOL


[Good Luck]
 
Posted by new2stocks on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by Ocqueoc:
LOL, most have moved on at hsm LOL

WTH would you guys do without cshd? Besides playing poker? That is funny , moved on LOL LOL


[Good Luck]

I see you post just about every day on ch4 and often on here as well...hard to stay away isn't it? I'm not into the brainwashing cult like type of thing one gets on ch4 though. I'd much rather have fun and laugh about the situation than have someone give me the run around about my "investment" and feel all depressed and confused about it. But, hey...to each their own. You should try poker, it's free and fun!
[Smile]
GLTY!
 
Posted by PCola77 on :
 
Poker can be free (i.e., not playing for money) or fun, but not both! [Smile]

Speaking of which, I'm having a tournament at my house tomorrow, any of you live in SE PA [Razz]

quote:
Originally posted by new2stocks:
You should try poker, it's free and fun!
[Smile]
GLTY!


 
Posted by Mr. CATIAEngineer on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by new2stocks:
quote:
Originally posted by Ocqueoc:
LOL, most have moved on at hsm LOL

WTH would you guys do without cshd? Besides playing poker? That is funny , moved on LOL LOL


[Good Luck]

I see you post just about every day on ch4 and often on here as well...hard to stay away isn't it? I'm not into the brainwashing cult like type of thing one gets on ch4 though. I'd much rather have fun and laugh about the situation than have someone give me the run around about my "investment" and feel all depressed and confused about it. But, hey...to each their own. You should try poker, it's free and fun!
[Smile]
GLTY!

Who is depressed? Maybe confused, but thats the way the pennys are from what I can see. Im not at all depressed about CSHD....and I really dont get the impression from Ocqueoc that she is either.

Anyway, im glad ive been able to entertain you. Id hate to think my posts have been a waste of time. [Smile]
 
Posted by Igor R on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by new2stocks:
quote:
Originally posted by Mr. CATIAEngineer:
Weeeeee....my posts are being taken to H S M now. Im finally famous! [Smile]

Thanks Dirtdigger....you saved me the trouble of signing up for that crooked board! Even the hotheaded MOD that should have banned himself long ago commented on my post. Ya'all are running out of good material it seems, how unfortunate. [Wink]

Anyway, still waiting to see whats in the latest pacer doc. It appears to have hit the Judges desk over a week ago. I thought the doc went into Pacer regardless of what the Judge thought of it....correct? No big rush there Judge Cooper, just a few lives youre holding in the balance. [BadOne]

Sure no problem, we got a good laugh out of your post! Most of us have moved on and accepted the fact that Rufus is a scammer. I hope someday you will too. I stick around for the humor, always a good laugh reading Rufus' posts as well as yours.

GLTY!
[Big Grin]

Moved on, are you joking? You guys rant and insult all day every day, you don't stop. Not that the insults are unwarranted, but nevertheless it doesn't cease.
 
Posted by T e x on :
 
You don't owe any apologies--that's the toughest thing there is, what you've been dealing with.

You're quite brave, in the best human sense of quiet but profound courage.

Please accept my very best wishes and deep respect as you continue to progress.

Best,
Tex
 
Posted by notever on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by Ocqueoc:
quote:
Originally posted by new2stocks:
quote:
Originally posted by Ocqueoc:
LOL, most have moved on at hsm LOL

WTH would you guys do without cshd? Besides playing poker? That is funny , moved on LOL LOL


[Good Luck]

I see you post just about every day on ch4 and often on here as well...hard to stay away isn't it? I'm not into the brainwashing cult like type of thing one gets on ch4 though. I'd much rather have fun and laugh about the situation than have someone give me the run around about my "investment" and feel all depressed and confused about it. But, hey...to each their own. You should try poker, it's free and fun!
[Smile]
GLTY!

Because you mentioned that I post often, I thought I;d explain a little about myself. Due to medical conditions that I have, it is very hard for me to leave my house, so I rarely do.Then my son died 2 and1/2 years ago and I could barely get out of bed due to the depression.If I did have to go somewhere it was exhausting to face people that knew me and would nicely ask how I;m doing and fib by saying okay, So I got where I didn't want to face even well meaning friends.
Then I bought some stock , it took a lot of lurking before I got up the nerve to start posting.I realized I could talk with the out side world without people seeing the wounded look in my eyes.I have met a lot of nice people along the way, while we all wait.So, yes, I tend to post way too much, but I try and not hurt anyone a long the way.Sorry if all of my posting offends you.And thanks for your concern about depression, but I am starting to get a little better, thanks to the people on the boards that I chat with.It will not bring my son back or take away the pain caused from his death and my medical problems, but it has seemed to help me.
My depression is not caused by this stock, but in a way this stock has helped with my depression.I would never have gotten so personal if you had not brought it up.

Thanks and GLTY

Ocqueoc,
I'm very sorry for the loss of your son. I can't even imagine that kind of pain. However I can relate to being homebound, and to the comfort that can be found amongst "strangers" on a message board. Sometimes people turn out to offer great kindness just when it is needed. Then there are those who just seem to enjoy offering rude comments. Please don't feel the need to justify your posts to people like that.
 
Posted by Ocqueoc on :
 
Tex and Notever,
Thank you both for your kind words. I never meant to get so personal in an open forum, but today was a bad day for me and the words just starting flowing.
 
Posted by notever on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by Ocqueoc:
Tex and Notever,
Thank you both for your kind words. I never meant to get so personal in an open forum, but today was a bad day for me and the words just starting flowing.

Your very welcome. I hope tomorrow is a better day for you. Good nite
 
Posted by T e x on :
 
pm
 
Posted by 10of13 on :
 
Stock Momma?
All I can say is WOW!!!
You should be VERY proud of what you just posted!!! You've come a very long way over the past year plus...and the thing is? YOU KNEW you had it in you all along!!! I am not sure I would have done as well...


[Wink] [Big Grin]

(I miss "chatting")
 
Posted by Ocqueoc on :
 
10,
I'm so sorry I missed ya, I really miss our chats!!!!!! You are a great friend and a wonderful, caring woman.

I hope all is well with you and your family.
 
Posted by NEL on :
 
up 2900% again, are we rich yet?
 
Posted by Stockstar69 on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by NEL:
up 2900% again, are we rich yet?

We are golden. Sorry, couldn't help it. [More Crap]
 
Posted by TimW on :
 
Wooot go CSHD!
 
Posted by mo-rydr on :
 
Does anyone know... is RPH's new board shut down also? Does he have a new new one? Is there any news about the court case?

TIA
 
Posted by milliam on :
 
RPH's new, new board is done. Rumor is that he's trying to get the security strengthened for it, but who knows? RPH's old board is the current one.
 
Posted by TimW on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by mo-rydr:
Is there any news about the court case?


Pacer shows last activity to be on 1/30/2008, submission to district judge, with no document for viewing.
 
Posted by unclerudy on :
 
Anything new happening in this?
 
Posted by milliam on :
 
There's some talks on RPH's board about going private and what not. I think the folks are looking for movement on this and RPH is giving them options for movement.
 
Posted by Igor R on :
 
The board going private, or the stock going private? Damn it rufus buy my shares for $15 like you said you would.
 
Posted by milliam on :
 
He did switch boards again, but I guess its not really private. They were talking about the company going private, but now it sounds like the decision is to stay the course. Some have the feeling that RPH feels the court case is moving forward in a good way for us. There was something mentioned about action on the hill, but I have no idea what that means. RPH is pushing for a grand jury for the case.

Like sand through the hourglass....
 
Posted by Igor R on :
 
At this rate we're going to run out of sand.
 
Posted by PCola77 on :
 
LOL. Everyone here will be dead before this is resolved.
 
Posted by Stockstar69 on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by PCola77:
LOL. Everyone here will be dead before this is resolved.

Yes, but our children will carry on the good fight and keep talking about RFP. Like the French Resistance in WWII the children of the CSHDers will battle the SEC until the SEC is dissolved by the United States of North America in the year 2023, led by the popular freedom fight Rufus Paul Harris the III.
[Big Grin] [More Crap]
 
Posted by Ocqueoc on :
 
Happy Easter to all!!!
 
Posted by Jenna on :
 
Happy Easter Everyone!!
 
Posted by NEL on :
 
Happy Wednesday, BUMP!
 
Posted by Moughrain on :
 
Found this via Google....might have been posted previously but didn't have time to read all the posts on this thread...But this is from YouTube and it does make you wonder if this here Rufus Paul Harris fella was just kinda stretching the truth a bit...LOL
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qD3jpg1TJEw
 
Posted by milliam on :
 
Thanks Moughrain...you pointing that out sure makes me sceptical now [Roll Eyes] .

I've seen that youtube before and its content sure doesn't add anything worthwhile to either side of this fight. The pictures are funny, but I can guarantee you they have nothing to do with RPH.

[Good Luck]
 
Posted by Mr. CATIAEngineer on :
 
OT : This video is well worth your time if you are interested in Shorting, specifically "Naked Shorting" in the market.

Christopher Cox

http://sec.gov/news/speech/2008/video0030408cc_short.wmv
 
Posted by unclerudy on :
 
Any news?
 
Posted by bilgert on :
 
Oh man Wattle Holdngs is trying to buy Circuit City! No wonder Rufus is laying low.

Circuit City sale inches closer
by Michael Rudnick
Updated 11:57 AM EST, Apr-7-2008

Facing activist pressure to put itself on the block, struggling electronics retailer Circuit City Stores Inc. has hired Goldman, Sachs & Co. for advice, two sources said Friday, April 4.

One source who requested anonymity said the company hired Goldman to evaluate a potential sale and "other solutions," but would not elaborate. The second person said Goldman had been hired within the past month, but did not know why. This source also said he believes a potential suitor is conducting due diligence on the retailer.

Activist Mark Wattles' Wattles Capital Management, which holds a 6.5% stake, nominated a slate of five directors to Circuit City's board in February. On April 2 he called on the retailer to oust chairman and chief executive Philip Schoonover and to hire an investment bank to evaluate potential buyer interest. The company released a letter to Wattles Friday agreeing to meet with him.

A Circuit City spokesman said late Friday that it had previously disclosed its hiring of Goldman to explore a sale of a Canadian subsidiary and to advise on the Wattles proxy fight but declined to comment on "any merger and acquisition speculation."
 
Posted by bilgert on :
 
Oh man, wrong spelling [Smile]

Man, I haven't posted on this board in almost a year. Must be this new Kona roast coffee our coffee distributor brought in. I'm wired.

The last time I seriously thought about CSHD was when I was doing my taxes- I was wishing I sold my (free) shares at a loss to offset my capital gains. Ah well. Hope everybody is doing well.
 
Posted by stocktrader22 on :
 
Question guys. Is Rufus in jail yet?
 
Posted by T e x on :
 
nope, still on the lam as far as I know...
 
Posted by stocktrader22 on :
 
tex, take a look at AAACW thread...very interesting in my opinion.
 
Posted by Stockstar69 on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by bilgert:
Oh man Wattle Holdngs is trying to buy Circuit City! No wonder Rufus is laying low.

Circuit City sale inches closer
by Michael Rudnick
Updated 11:57 AM EST, Apr-7-2008

Facing activist pressure to put itself on the block, struggling electronics retailer Circuit City Stores Inc. has hired Goldman, Sachs & Co. for advice, two sources said Friday, April 4.

One source who requested anonymity said the company hired Goldman to evaluate a potential sale and "other solutions," but would not elaborate. The second person said Goldman had been hired within the past month, but did not know why. This source also said he believes a potential suitor is conducting due diligence on the retailer.

Activist Mark Wattles' Wattles Capital Management, which holds a 6.5% stake, nominated a slate of five directors to Circuit City's board in February. On April 2 he called on the retailer to oust chairman and chief executive Philip Schoonover and to hire an investment bank to evaluate potential buyer interest. The company released a letter to Wattles Friday agreeing to meet with him.

A Circuit City spokesman said late Friday that it had previously disclosed its hiring of Goldman to explore a sale of a Canadian subsidiary and to advise on the Wattles proxy fight but declined to comment on "any merger and acquisition speculation."

funny, like Rufus will be running Circuit City. Oh well, can't do any worse than Bob Nardelli running Home Depot and then getting fired with a 100 million $ bonus.

God Bless America! Our legal system is run by idiots. Lawyers and courthouses are more guilty than the criminals inside them. [BadOne] [More Crap]
 
Posted by Mr. CATIAEngineer on :
 
Hiya folks!!

For those of you that remember CEOTA (thecon I know you remember them) they seem to be "back". To refresh memories, CEOTA was "The Climate Exchange of the Americas Inc" and was supposed to be the non-profit org that was supposed to be setting Alexander up with the log deal on the Amazon. CEOTA turned out to be bogus and eventually the website was shut down and the guy in charge (Gordon Brown I believe) was never heard from again.

Annnnnyway, they are now CEOTA (The Coffee Exchange of the Americas" and have a website again http://www.ceota.com

And look who their CFO is!!

---------------------------

Randy Moseley
Chief Financial Officer

Mr. Moseley, 60, serves (since 2007) as a director, Vice President and Chief Financial Officer of Utilicraft Aerospace Industries, Inc. (OTCBB;UITA), which is developing an airplane for the cargo industry. He also serves (since 2001) as a director, Executive Vice President and Chief Financial Officer of Urban Television Network Corp. (OTC BB: URBTE), a network of independent broadcast television stations and cable operators and since 2007 has also. Mr. Moseley was an Executive Vice President and the Chief Financial Officer for The Furia Organization, Inc. (OTC BB: FURA), a trucking company, during 2005 and 2006. From 1999 to 2001, Mr. Moseley served as an Executive Vice President and Chief Financial Officer for Tensor Information Systems, Inc., a private Fort Worth company in the business of developing custom software applications. Mr. Moseley, a Certified Public Accountant, earned a BBA degree from Southern Methodist University. He is a member of the Texas Society of CPAs and the AICPA.

---------------------------

Interesting eh?
 
Posted by stocktrader22 on :
 
Hahah. I can't find the symbol to their stock.
 
Posted by Mr. CATIAEngineer on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by stocktrader22:
Hahah. I can't find the symbol to their stock.

Me neither.

Anyone here from Texas recognize these companies?

http://www.pr.com/press-release/67854

"Supreme Bean customers will continue to enjoy great coffee and will now have access to CEOTA’s proprietary coffee roasts, for which CEOTA is becoming increasingly well known. Through this acquisition, we will be able to introduce our lines of super-premium coffees, hot cocoas, blended drinks and teas to a wider audience."

"Well known"? Anyone care to confirm this? [Confused]
 
Posted by Mr. CATIAEngineer on :
 
If you click on their August 15th PR it takes you to filings from a company named "BIG SKY INDUSTRIES I INC"

http://www.sec.gov/cgi-bin/browse-edgar?action=getcompany&CIK=0001121806&owner=i nclude&count=40

I might look into the relationship of all of these companies later.
 
Posted by Mr. CATIAEngineer on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by Mr. CATIAEngineer:
If you click on their August 15th PR it takes you to filings from a company named "BIG SKY INDUSTRIES I INC"

http://www.sec.gov/cgi-bin/browse-edgar?action=getcompany&CIK=0001121806&owner=i nclude&count=40

I might look into the relationship of all of these companies later.

It looks like someone created a bunch of shells with all similar names.

http://freeadvice.brand.edgar-online.com/PeopleFilingResults.aspx?PersonID=32439 15

SC 13D BIG SKY INDUSTRIES V INC 2/14/2001
SC 13D BIG SKY INDUSTRIES II INC 2/14/2001
SC 13D BIG SKY INDUSTRIES X INC 2/14/2001
SC 13D BIG SKY INDUSTRIES VI INC 2/14/2001
SC 13D BIG SKY INDUSTRIES IX INC 2/14/2001
SC 13D BIG SKY INDUSTRIES IV INC 2/14/2001
SC 13D BIG SKY INDUSTRIES VII INC 2/14/2001
SC 13D BIG SKY INDUSTRIES VIII INC 2/14/2001
SC 13D BIG SKY INDUSTRIES I INC 2/14/2001
SC 13D BIG SKY INDUSTRIES III INC 2/14/2001

Incorporater - David Bovi
 
Posted by T e x on :
 
by shells, do you mean actively trading entities or merely DBA/names?
 
Posted by Mr. CATIAEngineer on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by T e x:
by shells, do you mean actively trading entities or merely DBA/names?

At first glance they "look" like shells. But, as I mentioned above I was taken to one of those shells via the link on the CEOTA page. I guess Big Sky Industries I Inc could be DBA "CEOTA" (or would it be the other way around? heh).

It just seems strange to me that CEOTA would be used after what happened with the log deal.
 
Posted by Stockstar69 on :
 
Out of the woodwork...Amazing, I haven't seen so many familiar names since the (good) old CSHD days. Catia, Tex, Milliam, PCola...

Even the due dilligence, as good as it is to tie this (new) Ceota thing together is excellent.

Just don't fall for it again...PLEASE!
 
Posted by Mr. CATIAEngineer on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by Stockstar69:
Out of the woodwork...Amazing, I haven't seen so many familiar names since the (good) old CSHD days. Catia, Tex, Milliam, PCola...

Even the due dilligence, as good as it is to tie this (new) Ceota thing together is excellent.

Just don't fall for it again...PLEASE!

Fall for it? [Smile]

Naaa...just keeping tabs on the Furia bunch. Watching and learning. [Wink]
 
Posted by thecon00 on :
 
CAT:

that damn parrot was on the old CEOTA site as well. they couldn't even change the graphic, too funny - con
 
Posted by stocktrader2006 on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by thesource:
shakes head and walks back out of the room ....

Looks like he decided to stay out [Razz]

Wassup everyone? [Big Grin]
 
Posted by unclerudy on :
 
Any news?
 
Posted by milliam on :
 
Not much coming in from RPH's board, but I don't get to keep up with it as much. RPH is still posting some.

I've got a new job where I actually have to do work. Interesting concept, but it seems to correlate with a paycheck that doesn't bounce.
Good luck to us all.
 
Posted by Stock, Ham, and Mayo Sandwich on :
 
Someone wake up the judge please!
 
Posted by T e x on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by Stock, Ham, and Mayo Sandwich:
Someone wake up the judge please!

I doubt this case ranks very high on the judge's priorities.

Not saying I agree, but very few in the government have any idea how many folks are trading online, nowadays.
 
Posted by Ironman64 on :
 
Wonder where Don the Mod is hiding?

Things that make you go hmmmmmmm...
 
Posted by Ironman64 on :
 
I think RPH knows Don is dirty based on several of his recent posts. Saying that Don is involved in pump and dump operations in several companies he is involved in promoting and consulting for.

Interesting that Don hasn't made any of his "losing my cool" posts recently. Can't wait for him to fry.
 
Posted by T e x on :
 
What are you talking about? sounds funny for Harris to be calling out someone on a pump, lol...
 
Posted by Ironman64 on :
 
....and dump....that is the important part Tex.
 
Posted by T e x on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by Ironman64:
....and dump....that is the important part Tex.

you mean, like the dump that occurred with CSHD, from around $3.85?
 
Posted by Ironman64 on :
 
So, you have the proof that the SEC hasn't found in almost 2 years? There was a dump with CSHD, but it wasn't Harris that orchestrated it.

Unless you can bring forth the proof to show otherwise..... [Wink]
 
Posted by bilgert on :
 
Am I missing something here? Who the hell is Don?
 
Posted by Stockstar69 on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by Ironman64:
So, you have the proof that the SEC hasn't found in almost 2 years? There was a dump with CSHD, but it wasn't Harris that orchestrated it.

Unless you can bring forth the proof to show otherwise..... [Wink]

Just when you think this is dead, everyone starts talking about it again...

Where is the shareholders class action lawsuit against the SEC??? That's the question of the day. [Big Grin]
 
Posted by Ironman64 on :
 
Don Crowcher....part owner of Hot Stock Market

You'll hear more about him in due time. ')
 
Posted by Ironman64 on :
 
Just throwing this one out there....as a theory...

Would it excite anyone here if, hypothetically, a member of the FBI/CIA/SS, etc....made a comment to a shareholder that we should just be patient and let this play out with CSHD?

Hmmmmmm......
 
Posted by T e x on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by Ironman64:
Just throwing this one out there....as a theory...

Would it excite anyone here if, hypothetically, a member of the FBI/CIA/SS, etc....made a comment to a shareholder that we should just be patient and let this play out with CSHD?

Hmmmmmm......

no. sounds like simply more of the same wild-azz, wide-eyed lunacy.

Another poster made the relevant point: shareholders should sue.
 
Posted by Ironman64 on :
 
Knock yourself out, those that want to sue. Now again, who is the target of this suit?
 
Posted by Igor R on :
 
Looks like we have another foretelling prophet on our hands. The first one was a mummy, what are you?
 
Posted by 10of13 on :
 
[Confused] [BadOne] [More Crap]
 
Posted by Ironman64 on :
 
No mummy here.

Was simply a theory. [Wink]
 
Posted by Ironman64 on :
 
Sure got quiet.

Funny how when you rattle cages, you get lots of private messages.

Back to lurking, watch the next curve.
 
Posted by T e x on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by Ironman64:
Knock yourself out, those that want to sue. Now again, who is the target of this suit?

why, who else but Harris and his crew of corporate officers including the FHAL ignore-the-debt to Corey picnic?

He signed off on the famous "$15 reset," not to mention all that blathering, straight-up bullhooey about moon colonies and the Vatican and changing the market forever and too-much-to-list-here.

Let me ask you this?

How much do you figure insiders raked offa this play?
 
Posted by T e x on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by Ironman64:
Sure got quiet.

Funny how when you rattle cages, you get lots of private messages.

Back to lurking, watch the next curve.

WAKE UP!

there's no "curve"...
 
Posted by Ironman64 on :
 
Back from lurking for a while.

Tex, are you the same TEX on IHUB.... ??
 
Posted by T e x on :
 
you bet... [Smile]
 
Posted by Ironman64 on :
 
So, what's your angle? You seem to be equally sure as I, except on the other side of the spectrum.

I am willing to keep it civil as long as you do the same. But, honestly, would like to see what proof you and the the others on IHUB have...I mean hard proof.
 
Posted by T e x on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by Ironman64:
So, what's your angle? You seem to be equally sure as I, except on the other side of the spectrum.

I am willing to keep it civil as long as you do the same. But, honestly, would like to see what proof you and the the others on IHUB have...I mean hard proof.

apparently, you're not familiar with my posts...

quick background: got burned as a newbie, by a notorious PnD crew, the leader of which was in Riker's last I knew, apparently having been caught after graduating from simple PnD plays to hacking folks' trading accounts. Quite the escalation, that...

Anyway, I progressed to becoming an admin mod, here...not exactly analogous to the admin mods at da hub, but much more so than the "mods" on individual threads over there. If you keep posting here, you'll learn who the other mods are--as i said, not the same as da hub.

Now...my deal? Basically, I believe the more good traders, the better. To that end, I hate to see newbs get sucked into the undertow of a big ol' scam. For one, if they associate getting scammed with Allstocks, they may feel so discouraged that they leave Allstocks, never to return.

That's one thing.

BUT--if they feel so burned that they quit trading altogether? That hurts all good traders...

As far as being civil? lol, I can get cantakerous at times, but mostly I aim to be one of the more civil posters you'll ever meet. Well...over a body of work, that is... For instance, that guy in Riker's? I used to rip him pretty hard, when he showed up with yet-another-alias. [Wink]

So...what about your history?

Where you wanna start on this play?

Will say this: from my position of strength, I don't necessarily need "proof" of anything: all a good trader needs is sufficient evidence of rational doubt.

Ball's in your court...
 
Posted by Ironman64 on :
 
Let's start slowly....

I haven't posted much here....so, easy to search my past posts....remember my "theory" post? humor me for a second....what if it were true? hmmmmm.....
 
Posted by T e x on :
 
what if "which" part were true?

sorry, so far...that's not very interesting.
 
Posted by wallymac on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by Ironman64:
Let's start slowly....

I haven't posted much here....so, easy to search my past posts....remember my "theory" post? humor me for a second....what if it were true? hmmmmm.....

Now that's funny, you ask for hard proof and then come up with a theory and instead of backing it with any facts you ask Tex and the rest of us to suppose that it's true.

As far as facts on this play, OK. SEC took the powers that be to court, still pending the judges final decree but so far I haven't seen any answer from the company, since they don't have a lawyer and the answers that Rufus has written for himself have not gotten very far with the judge.

Stock is still trading on the GREY SHEETS, company has done nothing to improve that.

Last I looked, the company was broke and no longer was carrying through with the business plan that they PR'd.

Rufus was on the run, had lost his lease on the ranch along with his horses and was posting on various sites that he controlled but kept moving. Have no idea if he's still doing that.

Had talked of Proxy that never came to be, had talked of a new company where shareholders would be able to exchange their shares, that never happened.

Had a good friend, Paul Potter, disavow him, when he attempt to tell people that a public company Potter had bought was the exit for shareholders.

In other words, not one think he has stated has come to pass. So why in the world would anyone here play along with the whole what if it's true game? As far as humor, I guess you won't find much here when it comes to this subject. Most have moved on. Me, I check in now and again just for the heck of it.

I'm being civil, just want to know what your angle is?
 
Posted by wallymac on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by Ironman64:
Let's start slowly....

I haven't posted much here....so, easy to search my past posts....remember my "theory" post? humor me for a second....what if it were true? hmmmmm.....

Rufus, is that you? Theories and humor me, sure has a familiar ring to it.
 
Posted by T e x on :
 
ya, we're moving too fast, IM64...


Tell me some background, fill me in--what's your nick at da hub?
 
Posted by a surfer on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by wallymac:
quote:
Originally posted by Ironman64:
Let's start slowly....

I haven't posted much here....so, easy to search my past posts....remember my "theory" post? humor me for a second....what if it were true? hmmmmm.....

Rufus, is that you? Theories and humor me, sure has a familiar ring to it.
Profile for Ironman64
Member Status: Member
Registered: May 20, 2008
Posts: 12
Location: Nowhereville, USA
Occupation: Head Honcho
Interests: Short-Killer



I think your on to something Wally...

Kill shorty......Ahem.
 
Posted by T e x on :
 
"head honcho"
 
Posted by Igor R on :
 
Why would Rufus show up here? Hes got his own boards, and if that doesn't work I'm sure he'd try to go on HSM.
 
Posted by Ironman64 on :
 
The whole blueprint has been laid out for everyone, yet few have paid enough attention to put all the pieces together.

I am not here to attack, rather to incite logical thinking.

Why, may I ask, would Harris return to a seemingly worthless company in late 2006 if there weren't more to it than meets the eye?

I am merely saying, think outside the damn box. Now, here is the post I was referring to that no one cared to re-read -- "Would it excite anyone here if, hypothetically, a member of the FBI/CIA/SS, etc....made a comment to a shareholder that we should just be patient and let this play out with CSHD?"

The ones here and other message boards that proclaim they have this figured out by merely saying this was a P&D scam are gonna run for the hills when this is over with. For those that ask for proof, give me a break, there is none at this point in black and white. It is there if you are a critical thinker, but few exist. Those that aren't will dismiss all of this and rather choose to attack the message. Fine with me, but stand up and take YOUR LUMPS when you are found the fools.

Think outside the box my friends, entertain the possibilities, and don't dismiss cuz you just can't fathom it. Happy Memorials Day all.
 
Posted by T e x on :
 
lol...

first, this:

quote:
But, honestly, would like to see what proof you and the the others on IHUB have...I mean hard proof.
...implying you seek a rational, critical dialogue.


Now, you so soon devolve to this?

quote:
For those that ask for proof, give me a break, there is none at this point in black and white.
As far as thinking outside the box, we watched a bunch of folks do that by believing in the $15 pps reset and the 6-for-1 divvy-not divvy.

The "blueprint," indeed is there: run it, then let it implode...then persuade shareholders not to sue.

I asked you about your background and other nicks, yet you ignore that and continue in the same mysterious vein that everyone involved is sick of...

Your hypothetical question *has* been answered; the answer is no, it's not exciting: sounds just exactly like more of the same ol' same ol' ...
 
Posted by Ironman64 on :
 
I do not care to give out personal information on my identity. That is not required in this discussion. So, move on and get over it.

I don't believe you buy into your own answers. The blueprint is there, you just don't understand it. As for the theory, oh, I just can stop laughing at your response. Wonder how you would feel if you received such a response from a member of one of those agencies.

You sir, are not a critical thinker.
 
Posted by Ironman64 on :
 
By the way, have you ever wondered why not ONE single shareholder has sued this company at any point?

Lawsuits, whether frivilous or not, occur every day in this country. It has been said that Waatle shareholders approved the merger with Fronthaul. Wouldn't you think that just one of these individuals would initiate a lawsuit, with the loss of wealth after this merger....unless they know and trust what is currently happening?

C'mon...critical thinking my friends.
 
Posted by T e x on :
 
quote:
I do not care to give out personal information on my identity. That is not required in this discussion.
lol, who asked about personal information?

Remember when you wanted to start a "civil discussion"?

Your tone here is not too civil:

quote:
So, move on and get over it.
quote:
You sir, are not a critical thinker.
*****
Now, here I have no idea what you mean:

quote:
Wonder how you would feel if you received such a response from a member of one of those agencies.
As far as this goes ...

quote:
By the way, have you ever wondered why not ONE single shareholder has sued this company at any point?
well, my response ties into what you mention...But, sure, I believe a lawsuit is the shareholders' only real chance to get a look at the full story and maybe the only way to achieve disgorgement. However, 1) lawsuits are expensive, so any one or two individuals are not likely to mount a lawsuit on their own, and 2)Harris has succeeded in keeping a segment of shareholders at least somewhat mollified--and of those, I'm not aware of many who display critical thinking skills.

To get any traction, you simply must argue better--so far, all you're doing is rehash of Pope's and changing the markets and crushing evil shorty, etc...
 
Posted by Ironman64 on :
 
Hehehehe...

Exactly what I expected from you.

Far from a rehash. Remember this, and remember it well...when this is completed....the court case was but a minor speedbump in the overall successful completion of this journey. You think you have it all figured out, but the one thing you may try to explain, but can't, is why in the hell is the court case still lingering, uncompleted. There is a reason, sir....and therein will lie all the answers everyone needs to know to put this to rest. Once it is completed, everyone will say....WOW!!!

Lastly, read slowly this time...how would you feel if it were YOU that had the connections to communicate with a colleague within the CIA/FBI/SS and you were told to be patient and let this thing run its course. Further, what if you were told that "all is fine" from someone in one of these agencies that would know? Understand now? Resist the temptation to muddy the water and simply answer the question tex.
 
Posted by T e x on :
 
quote:
. . .but the one thing you may try to explain, but can't, is why in the hell is the court case still lingering, uncompleted.
all I know is the SEC and feds are notoriously slow, unless something requires prompt attention. Put it this way: what do Cassavant, Pino, and Olsen have in common? Did you notice *yet another delay* in the OSC hearing re: SLUJ?

Or are you saying all these players are together in this momentous "WOW!!!" ?

quote:
Further, what if you were told that "all is fine" from someone in one of these agencies that would know? Understand now?
No, I don't... I mean, I do have some of those connections, but nobody's told me anything.

So in your hypothetical situation, what role would I be in to get this "all is fine" answer?
 
Posted by wallymac on :
 
Critical thinking consists of mental processes of discernment, analysis and evaluation. It includes possible processes of reflecting upon a tangible or intangible item in order to form a solid judgment that reconciles scientific evidence with common sense. In contemporary usage "critical" has a certain negative connotation that does not apply in the present case. Though the term "analytical thinking" may seem to convey the idea more accurately, critical thinking clearly involves synthesis, evaluation, and reconstruction of thinking, in addition to analysis.

Critical thinkers gather information from all senses, verbal and/or written expressions, reflection, observation, experience and reasoning. Critical thinking has its basis in intellectual criteria that go beyond subject-matter divisions and which include: clarity, credibility, accuracy, precision, relevance, depth, breadth, logic, significance and fairness.

Those that disagree with your theories because they are absent of facts are indeed applying Critical thinking. In fact what you are asking is that people here use a different type of thinking generally used in movie making, the Suspension of Disbelief.
 
Posted by Ironman64 on :
 
Tex -- Your last question in your previous post....(So in your hypothetical situation, what role would I be in to get this "all is fine" answer?) -- What do you think? Who do you think? Someone connected / involved? At liberty only to say this....good question and very warm.... [Smile]

Wally -- LMAOROFL -- you are exactly what that post refers to.... I honestly can't wait to see the reactions of ones like you as you fall on the floor twitching....unable to process. Hehehehe.
 
Posted by Ironman64 on :
 
Go Spurs.....stop the bleeding tonight.

Final score -- Spurs 91, Lakers 88 (prediction only)
 
Posted by T e x on :
 
quote:
Tex -- Your last question in your previous post....(So in your hypothetical situation, what role would I be in to get this "all is fine" answer?) -- What do you think? Who do you think? Someone connected / involved? At liberty only to say this....good question and very warm....
you're playing games, dude...

look, you initiated the "discussion," and I'm discussing--but I can't "enter" your hypothetical world with all these guessing games. To answer the question, I have to know from what perspective...

gotta tell you, though, this is getting boring...
 
Posted by wallymac on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by Ironman64:
Tex -- Your last question in your previous post....(So in your hypothetical situation, what role would I be in to get this "all is fine" answer?) -- What do you think? Who do you think? Someone connected / involved? At liberty only to say this....good question and very warm.... [Smile]

Wally -- LMAOROFL -- you are exactly what that post refers to.... I honestly can't wait to see the reactions of ones like you as you fall on the floor twitching....unable to process. Hehehehe.

Rufus, you have been saying that since before the SEC shut you down. Nothing has changed.

Instead of playing these games that you love so much, how about answering some questions like:

What happened to the proxy and everything else you promised? Not one came to fruition. What effect does that have on critical thinking?
[BadOne] [Wall Bang] [More Crap]
 
Posted by Ironman64 on :
 
Wally -- I enjoy your comedy, really, but you and I both know this is not Harris. Regarding proxy and other strategic pieces of information, have you ever once thought that those statements were intended for other eyes and ears?

Tex -- I will put you out of your own misery, since you are bored. And just as things were getting interesting. Just earmark our recent conversations until a later date, when you will marvel at the content here.
 
Posted by Igor R on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by Ironman64:
Wally -- I enjoy your comedy, really, but you and I both know this is not Harris. Regarding proxy and other strategic pieces of information, have you ever once thought that those statements were intended for other eyes and ears?

Tex -- I will put you out of your own misery, since you are bored. And just as things were getting interesting. Just earmark our recent conversations until a later date, when you will marvel at the content here.

So what if we earmark it and nothing happens to marvel over?

BTW, it can't be Harris. This guy has a semblance of grammar, spelling, and punctuation in his posts.
 
Posted by Ironman64 on :
 
Igor -- there is zero doubt in my mind....zero.
 
Posted by wallymac on :
 
Maybe he finally learned how to use spell check.
 
Posted by Ironman64 on :
 
Tex -- being located in Ft. Worth, have you ever spoken with any of the major Texas players involved with CSHD?
 
Posted by Igor R on :
 
So, is there anything you can shed light on that lets you have this zero doubt?
 
Posted by T e x on :
 
buzz off...you want everything your way, whoever you are.

If you want to engage me again...bring an A-game instead of kids' games.
 
Posted by Ironman64 on :
 
I'll take that as a yes. Figured as much.
 
Posted by bilgert on :
 
Interesting city you come from Ironman, because that's exactly where your unclear line of reasoning originated from.

I read through all your cryptic nonsense and couldn't come up with 1 concrete fact or speculative statement. If you just came out and said, "Pigs canfly." I could at least respect you for the clarity of your conviction. but as it stand you have said nothing over dozens of posts and insulted 2 of the most respected posters here. nice job.
 
Posted by wallymac on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by Ironman64:
Wally -- I enjoy your comedy, really, but you and I both know this is not Harris. Regarding proxy and other strategic pieces of information, have you ever once thought that those statements were intended for other eyes and ears?

Tex -- I will put you out of your own misery, since you are bored. And just as things were getting interesting. Just earmark our recent conversations until a later date, when you will marvel at the content here.

Interesting that you post, "This is not Harris", instead of the more appropriate, I'm not Harris.

Also interesting that you intimate that claims were made as a smoke screen when they also used similar wording of mark this post. So is this just another in a long line of smoke screens?

[More Crap]
 
Posted by T e x on :
 
ackchully, you guys, that lil episode was kinda...

creepy
 
Posted by wallymac on :
 
Very Creepy.
 
Posted by Ironman64 on :
 
Disturbia......


Great movie.
 
Posted by a surfer on :
 
Ironman64... I have written off the $107,000 lost by my family.....

Still hold the shares of course as a reminder....

Show me the money.....then come here and talk.
 
Posted by Igor R on :
 
I don't even want to waste money on the commission to even try to sell the shares lol. Going to wait until the next E-Trade commission free day to hopefully get rid of that crap from my account.
 
Posted by Ironman64 on :
 
Surfer -- do you have your shares in cert form? If not, do so, then sock them away for a while. Although I am 100% confident in what I say, I am not asking you to buy into it all....just don't do anything, such as selling, etc...which will make it impossible to realize a substantial profit when the "unthinkable" happens in the future.
 
Posted by bilgert on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by Igor R:
I don't even want to waste money on the commission to even try to sell the shares lol. Going to wait until the next E-Trade commission free day to hopefully get rid of that crap from my account.

Hey Igor-commission is deductable on your taxes [Smile] . OT: Free*Trade day was awesome. I rid my account of a lot of past transgressions from when I was a newb. (PYCT, etc.). Thankfully, I am past those days.
 
Posted by Igor R on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by Ironman64:
Surfer -- do you have your shares in cert form? If not, do so, then sock them away for a while. Although I am 100% confident in what I say, I am not asking you to buy into it all....just don't do anything, such as selling, etc...which will make it impossible to realize a substantial profit when the "unthinkable" happens in the future.

Tut used to say the exact same thing, and what happened? $3.85/share turned into .002. No sign from Rufus or the company, stock delisted, people's lives ruined, pending SEC case, no $15/share, no reset, no 6:1, no proxy. Nothing, but crap.

So, what makes anything you say different than the rest?
 
Posted by PCola77 on :
 
Wow, looks like I missed some fun...

Ironman, apparently you have no concept of how the SEC works. Some day, when you have some free time, just poke around on the internet and see how many times you find thing like:

"Jan 2008 - Charges were filed today against 2 stock promotors who made $10million in a pump and dump scheme in 2003.", etc.

There's no reason to search for some secret reason why this is "still" in process after what, 18 months, when SEC halts from yeas prior have not yet been resolved.

As for people not believing how well it worked out in the end when it finally does end, in the infinitecimally small chance that this does "work out" as you said, the cryptic ramblings of Rufus have cost people here and elsewhere HUNDRED OF THOUSANDS OF DOLLARS. Spin it any way that you want, and say it's their own fault for not holding long enough, but there were lives who have been unfathomably altered by this situation in a terribly negative way. People whose lives have been shattered by the little games that he likes to play. Think about the people who bought into his mumbo jumbo 2 years ago with more than they could afford to lose. The cries of $15 resets, 6:1 dividends, etc., never mentioned a 2+ year holding period, and so understandably, some people HAD NO CHOICE but to sell for a substantial loss just to recoup some small piece of their initial investment. Maybe there was someone who bought in, even that intended to stay for the long haul, and lost his job (not unlikely in the current economy), had to liquidate his/her account to help care for a loved one (not uncommon at all), or any other one of thousands of legitimate reasons. Rufus F*CKED those people, and F*CKED them hard. Maybe this will work out for a few lucky ones in the end, but it will never erase the disdain that I and others feel towards him for unneccesarily screwing hundreds of people out of thousands and thousands of dollars, and without exaggerating, costing some their families, friends, and who knows, it wouldn't surprise me at all if we learn someday that one or more people lost so much money that they decided to end their own life.

So yeah, laugh it up, enjoy your wealth if this does happen as you expect, but don't forget the countless people whose lives were ruined by some hack who got his jollies by speaking in riddle.

I bought a bunch of shares for under a penny, and if I do get rich off of it, the first thing I'll do is try to help out those friends I've made here who's lives were severely affected by this ridiculous stock. I'd ask the same of you, but even the most destitute probably wouldn't take a penny from someone who is as obviously sick and twisted as you.

In closing, I feel the need to give you a hearty *BLEEP*, and please pass that along to "Rufus" as well.

[ May 26, 2008, 20:51: Message edited by: T e x ]
 
Posted by Ironman64 on :
 
PCola77 -- since you feel the need to give me a "hearty *BLEEP*, name the place and time. I'll be there...

But be forewarned, *BLEEP, BLEEP, BLEEP*

As for the rest of you, why don't you just let this play out....before you pass judgement on those that have not been proven one bit guilty. Otherwise, I am telling you, there are gonna be a lot of individuals trying to look themselves in the mirror over their judgmental behavior....

Attack me, no biggie here....I have very thick skin. If just a few of you think twice, I have succeeded in my mission. Bottom line folks, things are not as they seem. You will see.

[ May 26, 2008, 20:53: Message edited by: T e x ]
 
Posted by Ironman64 on :
 
Hehehe, Tex.

Cooler heads prevail I suppose.
 
Posted by T e x on :
 
Hey, fellas, you may notice I edited a coupla posts here: Although I understand, must remind everybody--the stock or the company.

Ironman: No--there's no "hehehe." Delusional posting is one thing...But if you ever threaten another member here, you will not only be submitted to the Webmaster's list for ban candidates (with *my* hearty recommendation), you also will be reported to as many legal authorities as I personally can think of...

OK, back to regular programming--carry on, fellas...
 
Posted by Ironman64 on :
 
OMG....btw, is there a list anywhere here of the ones that are mods?
 
Posted by PCola77 on :
 
Let this play out? That was what people were saying when this opened around $2 on the greys. Guess what, the people that "let this play out" that could have gotten out even, or close to it ended up losing pretty much everything. So sorry that after 18 months it rings a bit hollow, especially coming from an anonymous poster who's been here all of a week or so and refuses to give any background on why he's saying what he's saying.

I'm not a violent person, and I wish no physical harm to anyone, but ya know what, if Rufus really did lose his ranch and horses, then I'm glad. He personally cost a lot of people a lot more than physical posessions, and I think he's just insane enough to either not understand that fact, or to think that it's the fault of that person, and he has no responsibility.

And by the way, your argument that no one can prove the "dump" part of the P&D is retarded. When a stock goes from $4 to under a penny, there was a dump. No one really cares who dumped or why, just that someone dumped, and now their money is gone.

Oh, and if a friend/colleague at the SEC/FBI/SS said "be patient and let this play out", I would assume he would mean that I will find out all of the details of how the P&D was orchastrated when all of the i's are dotted and t's crossed. Maybe I'm just not enough of a conspiracy theorist, and can't "think outside the box" enough, but my ability to see things as they really are instead of living in a fantasy world of "what if's" has served me well in stock trading and life in general.

LOL, even your screen name is based on a ficticious character. You obviously can't handle the real world...

quote:
Originally posted by Ironman64:
PCola77 -- since you feel the need to give me a "hearty *BLEEP*, name the place and time. I'll be there...

But be forewarned, *BLEEP, BLEEP, BLEEP*

As for the rest of you, why don't you just let this play out....before you pass judgement on those that have not been proven one bit guilty. Otherwise, I am telling you, there are gonna be a lot of individuals trying to look themselves in the mirror over their judgmental behavior....

Attack me, no biggie here....I have very thick skin. If just a few of you think twice, I have succeeded in my mission. Bottom line folks, things are not as they seem. You will see.


 
Posted by Ironman64 on :
 
It will be found and revealed once this plays out that Harris (or any on his side of the fence) was nowhere near the dump in CSHD. It will find that friends of many here, however, were quite involved. They will pay a hefty price.

Chew on that for a while.
 
Posted by PCola77 on :
 
Here's what you fail to understand. Because of Rufus, people lost significant chunks of their life savings. Had he never opened his mouth with his garbled proclamations, you wouldn't have seen anyone hold this from $4 down to even as low as $1. No one cares who dumped, and no one cares if Rufus is found to be totally innocent in all of this, people are upset that they LOST MONEY. If Rufus is only concerned that his reputation will come out of this unscathed, then that in and of itself shows how much he is at fault, because he led people to believe that they would get their money back and more, but as you seem to be framing it, he's merely out to prove he wasn't the cause of the drop. So whether he's guilty of dumping or "just" guilty of misleading people, he's still guilty in the eyes of everyone. No matter how this plays out, Rufus does not come out of this with his reputation in tact.

He reminds me of an elementary school kid who just keeps telling bigger and bigger lies to try to get everyone to like him. As if that behavior isn't sad enough by itself, he brought hundreds of innocent people into his ruse, and caused damage that will never be undone.

Sorry man, (and I use that term loosely), but no one likes Rufus, no one respects Rufus, and no one cares if Rufus fades into Bolivian (as Mike Tyson would say). Maybe someday he'll realize that, and bow out quietly, instead of continuing to give people false hope.

If I'm wrong, I'll be man enough to admit it. I've been here for a while and am not going anywhere. But we all know that if you're wrong, you'll never be heard from again, so you have nothing to lose by making these wild posts. It's a shame that you have no integrity, but that's the nature of the message board beast.

quote:
Originally posted by Ironman64:
It will be found and revealed once this plays out that Harris (or any on his side of the fence) was nowhere near the dump in CSHD. It will find that friends of many here, however, were quite involved. They will pay a hefty price.

Chew on that for a while.


 
Posted by bilgert on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by Ironman64:
It will be found and revealed once this plays out that Harris (or any on his side of the fence) was nowhere near the dump in CSHD. It will find that friends of many here, however, were quite involved. They will pay a hefty price.

Chew on that for a while.

How will it be found? Whom are you speaking of and from who will they pay a hefty price? This all smells of nonsense. If you want to have any sort of credibility, you need to speak clearly and forthright. Here let me help you.

1) I believe _________________ was involved in dumping of CSHD shares prior to CSHD becoming a grey sheet
2) I believe this to be true because ___________________________
3) __________________ can verify my claims
4)The way in which ___________________ will be penalized for their dumping tactics will be__________________________________________
5)Anything I (Ironman64) says should be considered credible because___________________

Until then, I will amuse myself by chewing air.
 
Posted by new2stocks on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by Ironman64:
It will be found and revealed once this plays out that Harris (or any on his side of the fence) was nowhere near the dump in CSHD. It will find that friends of many here, however, were quite involved. They will pay a hefty price.

Chew on that for a while.

Griff, is that you? Or are you ronburgundy? lol
 
Posted by Jo4321 on :
 
I still have my CSHD shares that sit and mock me in my account, but I have not paid much attention to this thread lately. But Ironman intrigues me.

Ironman, if your ideal scenario were to come to pass, what would happen to the following people:

Person A: Bought 10,000 shares at .20 before the run up, but did not sell any, because they were waiting for the $15 reset and 6:1.
Person B: Bought 10,000 shares at $2 and is still holding
Person C: Bought 10,000 shares at .20 on the way down, and is still holding
Person D: Bought 100,000 shares at .01, and is still holding.

Now, what about the same 4 people, but if they sold at some point to just take their loss?

Person E: Bought 10,000 shares at .20 before the run up, and has since sold for almost a total loss
Person F: Bought 10,000 shares at $2 and has since sold for almost a total loss
Person G: Bought 10,000 shares at .20 on the way down, and has since sold for almost a total loss
Person H: Bought 100,000 shares at .01, and has since sold for almost a total loss

I'd like to hear your take on each of the 8 cases, but the question I am most concerned with is the case of Person B who put $20,000 into this. Do they have any chance of ever seeing that money again, or do you think that we will eventually find out that Rufus wasn't involved in the dump of shares, but that person is pretty much out of luck?

I'm also curious if your end result assumes you can treat Person B and Person D differently, or if Person B getting their $20,000 back means that Person D pulls in $200,000 on this.

What say you?

Jo
 
Posted by Ironman64 on :
 
Are these two members on IHUB?

Are you the same new2stocks once tight with MA/DP/JG?
 
Posted by Lockman on :
 
http://stockcharts.com/h-sc/ui?s=CSHD&p=D&yr=1&mn=0&dy=0&id=p20695624959

Great chart! lol
 
Posted by T e x on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by Ironman64:
Are these two members on IHUB?

Are you the same new2stocks once tight with MA/DP/JG?

quote:
I do not care to give out personal information on my identity. That is not required in this discussion. So, move on and get over it.
how...

odd.
 
Posted by PCola77 on :
 
Tex, I think you're being rather rude to our new guest by not allowing him to play by his own hypocritical rules.

quote:
Originally posted by T e x:
quote:
Originally posted by Ironman64:
Are these two members on IHUB?

Are you the same new2stocks once tight with MA/DP/JG?

quote:
I do not care to give out personal information on my identity. That is not required in this discussion. So, move on and get over it.
how...

odd.


 
Posted by T e x on :
 
ya, life's a beach [Big Grin]
 
Posted by Ironman64 on :
 
Tex --

Are you New2's counsel? The quote you posted from me about my identity is my personal preference. My question pertaining to New2 and his identity was simply that, a question.....If he chooses not to answer, that is his decision.

However, I think anyone with gray matter within their cranium, and absent of ulterior motives, can quickly assertain what is going on here.

I am here alone....it is obvious the same can not be said of others.
 
Posted by PCola77 on :
 
So Ironman, in your perfect world, people would pop onto message boards, posting theories and innuendo, and the people who have been here for many years would simply take their post at face value, ignoring the fact that hundreds of people have come before you that make statements about good things that would happen to a particluar penny stock that never came to fruition, and the poster never shwoed up again? So you ask us to open our minds and think, but in doign so, be naive enough to remove all semblence of logical thinking that suggests that you are full of it, like the hunderds before you?
 
Posted by wallymac on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by Ironman64:
Tex --

Are you New2's counsel? The quote you posted from me about my identity is my personal preference. My question pertaining to New2 and his identity was simply that, a question.....If he chooses not to answer, that is his decision.

However, I think anyone with gray matter within their cranium, and absent of ulterior motives, can quickly assertain what is going on here.

I am here alone....it is obvious the same can not be said of others.

You chose to come here and play games. You also chose to insult the intelligence of those that are here. Who actually has ulterior motives?

I would say that the person that comes here and posts wild thoeries with nothing to back it up, other than to say we should suspend our disbelief because he says he knows things and spreads wild conspiracy theories.

If you had taken any time to actually read what has been posted on this board you would see that we have discussed MA and his profits along with his gifting of shares but that fact doesn't give Rufus a free ride nor his mouth pieces that continue to spout off about the pot of gold at the end of the rainbow.

By the way, I don't believe in leprechauns either.
 
Posted by PCola77 on :
 
Well then wally, you're just dumb. Haven't you ever seen a lucky charms commercial? Didn't your momma ever teach you that if you see it on TV it must be real? [Big Grin]


quote:
Originally posted by wallymac:

By the way, I don't believe in leprechauns either.


 
Posted by T e x on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by Ironman64:
Tex --

Are you New2's counsel? The quote you posted from me about my identity is my personal preference. My question pertaining to New2 and his identity was simply that, a question.....If he chooses not to answer, that is his decision.

However, I think anyone with gray matter within their cranium, and absent of ulterior motives, can quickly assertain what is going on here.

I am here alone....it is obvious the same can not be said of others.

*SYSTEM RESPONSE*
auto-generator
05272008

Membername T e x has left the following message in the AUTO-QUEUE:

"Sorry, can't respond directly until you play fairly with others, to wit, 'what's your angle?'; 'is this the same alias?'; etc.
 
Posted by new2stocks on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by Ironman64:
Are these two members on IHUB?

Are you the same new2stocks once tight with MA/DP/JG?

Nope, I believe you have me confused with New2market.
 
Posted by Ironman64 on :
 
Yes, you are correct. My apologies for the misunderstanding New2stocks.

BTW, the other guy is reportedly in a lot of hot water with others.
 
Posted by tmanfromtexas on :
 
Man, this is almost as good as the Wanta Scandal that was up on alot of conspiracy boards last year. I wonder when the two will become intertwined and become one? HEHEHEH. TMAN...
 
Posted by Sandusky on :
 
Hi there. Well I see that after 6 months (last time I looked at this) not much has changed. Unless there's something afoot anyone would like to share I'll check in with you all in about 6 more. Happy trading...
 
Posted by PCola77 on :
 
Ironman, can you reply to this post? I'm curious if you think some of these people will recoup their money if things go like you think they will, or if it will just be the case that Rufus will be proven "innocent".

quote:
Originally posted by Jo4321:
I still have my CSHD shares that sit and mock me in my account, but I have not paid much attention to this thread lately. But Ironman intrigues me.

Ironman, if your ideal scenario were to come to pass, what would happen to the following people:

Person A: Bought 10,000 shares at .20 before the run up, but did not sell any, because they were waiting for the $15 reset and 6:1.
Person B: Bought 10,000 shares at $2 and is still holding
Person C: Bought 10,000 shares at .20 on the way down, and is still holding
Person D: Bought 100,000 shares at .01, and is still holding.

Now, what about the same 4 people, but if they sold at some point to just take their loss?

Person E: Bought 10,000 shares at .20 before the run up, and has since sold for almost a total loss
Person F: Bought 10,000 shares at $2 and has since sold for almost a total loss
Person G: Bought 10,000 shares at .20 on the way down, and has since sold for almost a total loss
Person H: Bought 100,000 shares at .01, and has since sold for almost a total loss

I'd like to hear your take on each of the 8 cases, but the question I am most concerned with is the case of Person B who put $20,000 into this. Do they have any chance of ever seeing that money again, or do you think that we will eventually find out that Rufus wasn't involved in the dump of shares, but that person is pretty much out of luck?

I'm also curious if your end result assumes you can treat Person B and Person D differently, or if Person B getting their $20,000 back means that Person D pulls in $200,000 on this.

What say you?

Jo


 
Posted by Ironman64 on :
 
Sandusky -- i like your sig.....reminds me of an old saying...."If you are going to take a shot, make it a head shot"
 
Posted by bilgert on :
 
Hey man, just ignore the questions you don't like that's totally cool. That's the ol' Ross Perot method and look where it got him!
 
Posted by Mr. CATIAEngineer on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by Ironman64:
Tex --

Are you New2's counsel? The quote you posted from me about my identity is my personal preference. My question pertaining to New2 and his identity was simply that, a question.....If he chooses not to answer, that is his decision.

However, I think anyone with gray matter within their cranium, and absent of ulterior motives, can quickly assertain what is going on here.

I am here alone....it is obvious the same can not be said of others.

Ironman, I assume you have a very good reason for coming into a thread that had nothing but a faint heartbeat and make attempts to stir up the waters a bit. Have you been banned from everywhere else and this is the last place you have to "get your word out"?

As most know, ive alway rested in the "Pro CSHD" camp. However, there are times that I question my position when people like yourself come out of the woodwork for NO REASON AT ALL spouting off rumors and specualtion about the future of this stock. You came to the wrong board with that attitude my friend....we cut that BS here long ago.

If you have some "information" that leads you to believe that we can all sit tight and let this play out, congratulations. However, coming in here with the comments you are making is counterproductive IMO. Everyone here has been relatively quiet in comparison to the other boards. Some have made their opinions public while others just wait in silence. NO ONE asked for someone like yourself to come along and tell us its all going to be ok.

So, please explain, are you here because you have been banned everywhere else or was there a post/poster on this board that appeared as if they needed your help?

You say "I am here alone....it is obvious the same can not be said of others". What makes you so alone here? As far as I know we are all in the same boat here, what makes you different? Your posts come off very strong and IMO turn people off because of similar posts we have all witnessed on the various boards the past could of years.

I didnt mean to go so long with this. Basically, IMHO, your introduction posts on this thread cause more damage than good. Those that "believe" dont want anymore pumpers and those that dont "believe" want it even less. I know where I stand, your posts wont change that....but its a little late in the game to start playing on peoples emotions here at allstocks. IMO its wrong and the reasoning behind it confuses me.

One question for you though. How do YOU know that there arent any active lawsuits forming against Mr Harris or CSHD? Is that a guess or is that another fact that you heard filter down from some 3 letter agency?

Anyway, where are my manners. Welcome to the thread, I hope through your solid connections and DD skills you will be a valuable resource to our family here. Just please leave your crystal ball at the door.

Peace
 
Posted by Ironman64 on :
 
bilgert -- I am sure I will make even more friends after this one --- but, per your request --

1) I believe _________________ was involved in dumping of CSHD shares prior to CSHD becoming a grey sheet
2) I believe this to be true because ___________________________
3) __________________ can verify my claims
4)The way in which ___________________ will be penalized for their dumping tactics will be__________________________________________
5)Anything I (Ironman64) says should be considered credible because___________________

(1) A host of individuals, including Perley/Texas 100 (were)
(2) in speaking with a number of shareholders and several other ex-friends of this group, it was affirmed that they witnessed some of this behavior. It was further mentioned that up to $18M has been deposited in a safe place by one of the Texas 100.
(3) A number of shareholders who have spoken to me in confidence
(4) These individuals; penalty will be assessed by the various law enforcement agencies, but likely will include DOJ and FBI (federal)
(5) I have done my research instead of blindly making assessments.

Fire away....thick skin, remember.
 
Posted by Ironman64 on :
 
Hi Mr. CATIAEngineer.

I am not here to pump. I am not an insider to any company. I just do research, make connections and protect the identity of those I talk to. Like many news reporters, I will not breach the trust of those I speak to by giving their identity or as you might imagine, the information stream would be cut off. I am no more special than any others here, anyone could do what I have done if you so chose to.

Regarding lawsuits, I have heard through my list of sources that you yourself were testing the waters of a lawsuit some months ago. Perhaps by me stating this you will know that I don't blindly throw out crap. You should be able to affirm or deny whether you did such a thing.
 
Posted by Mr. CATIAEngineer on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by Ironman64:
Hi Mr. CATIAEngineer.

I am not here to pump. I am not an insider to any company. I just do research, make connections and protect the identity of those I talk to. Like many news reporters, I will not breach the trust of those I speak to by giving their identity or as you might imagine, the information stream would be cut off. I am no more special than any others here, anyone could do what I have done if you so chose to.

Regarding lawsuits, I have heard through my list of sources that you yourself were testing the waters of a lawsuit some months ago. Perhaps by me stating this you will know that I don't blindly throw out crap. You should be able to affirm or deny whether you did such a thing.

Well congratulations, you just placed yourself in a fairly small group of people ive learned to keep my eye on.

Correct, I was ACCUSED of "testing the waters of a lawsuit". That accusation led to a telephone discussion between myself and Mr Harris. Im fairly confident of who started the rumor, and Mr Harris himself informed me of how the rumor made it back to him.

So, I will confirm that there was indeed a rumor that I was starting a Class Action lawsuit against Mr Harris. However, I will strongly deny ANY truth to that rumor. At least I post under the same alias everywhere so these types of things can be handled in a man to man sort of fashion.

Share with the class how that rumor was started? Do you even know or is it more hearsay that you choose to spread to show how much you think you know? What did Mr Harris and I speak about on that phone call? As a result of that call, what "players" were later called out by Mr Harris on his board?

See, several people know that the rumor existed....IMO only a few people still believe I was truly "testing the waters" for any sort of lawsuit. You are either one of those few or are just trying to start trouble. Good luck with that.

Your "list of sources" should get their story straight because if their opinion of where this company is headed is as factual as me "testing the waters" for a lawsuit you are all barking up the wrong tree. Your "facts" are laughable at best.
 
Posted by a surfer on :
 
Here is some reading for ironman to acquaint himself.....


I figure there are 250,000 posts.

cut and paste entire link.

http://www.allstocks.com/stockmessageboard/cgi-bin/ultimatebb.cgi/ubb/get_topic/ f/8/t/022582/p/1.html?
http://www.allstocks.com/stockmessageboard/cgi-bin/ultimatebb.cgi/ubb/get_topic/ f/8/t/023669/p/1.html?
http://www.allstocks.com/stockmessageboard/cgi-bin/ultimatebb.cgi/ubb/get_topic/ f/2/t/012513/p/1.html?
http://www.allstocks.com/stockmessageboard/cgi-bin/ultimatebb.cgi/ubb/get_topic/ f/8/t/023954/p/1.html?
http://www.allstocks.com/stockmessageboard/cgi-bin/ultimatebb.cgi/ubb/get_topic/ f/8/t/023954/p/1.html?
http://www.allstocks.com/stockmessageboard/cgi-bin/ultimatebb.cgi/ubb/get_topic/ f/2/t/012891/p/1.html?
http://www.allstocks.com/stockmessageboard/cgi-bin/ultimatebb.cgi/ubb/get_topic/ f/2/t/012978/p/1.html?
http://www.allstocks.com/stockmessageboard/cgi-bin/ultimatebb.cgi/ubb/get_topic/ f/2/t/013019/p/1.html?
http://www.allstocks.com/stockmessageboard/cgi-bin/ultimatebb.cgi/ubb/get_topic/ f/2/t/013061/p/1.html?
 
Posted by Ocqueoc on :
 
Well, well

After months, out of the woodwork comes "another one"

Ironman, we DO not want, NOR NEED troublemakers, which IMO, it appears that is what you are.

IMO, also. Watch what you say, sometimes, words that are put out on a public board, come back to bite you on the behind.

Do not insult us, by appearing to be "in the know"
We have ALL had enough of your "kind"
again, IMO

I think I "know" who you are.
--------------
Hello, to everyone else
 
Posted by Ironman64 on :
 
Please keep in mind, I am not saying that the class action target was Harris. And yes, MrCat, I know about your conversation with him.

The purpose of your suit was to be to get things rolling with a legal action. To request trading records, etc....

Does your response change any now?
 
Posted by Mr. CATIAEngineer on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by Ironman64:
Please keep in mind, I am not saying that the class action target was Harris. And yes, MrCat, I know about your conversation with him.

The purpose of your suit was to be to get things rolling with a legal action. To request trading records, etc....

Does your response change any now?

No, my response doesnt change at all. I made no attempt whatsoever to make a move on CSHD in a legal sense.

"The purpose of your suit"

You still write as if I have / had a suit planned or in progress. My interest in seeing the trading records pulled is no different than anyone elses but there was never a discussion of a lawsuit other than the phone conversation with Mr Harris where the question actually came up "Who would the suit be against if there were to be one?".

If you really know about the discussion I had with Mr Harris im surprised you arent already aware of these facts. On that same note, I might ask Mr Harris why you know about my conversation with him and chose to discuss it on the board. You say you protect your sources but spilled your guts against the Boss himself.
 
Posted by PCola77 on :
 
Ironman, can you answer the simple question of "Will people who have seen their investments in this go from $20,000 to worthless ever see their initial cash outlay again". I don't think many people here are concerned with who gets what punishment as much as they are interested if they will ever see those $$$ again.
 
Posted by new2stocks on :
 
"You say you protect your sources but spilled your guts against the Boss himself."


What is Rufus the boss of anyway? He was supposed to be working for the shareholders, we the shareholders do not work for him!!!!
 
Posted by Mr. CATIAEngineer on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by new2stocks:
"You say you protect your sources but spilled your guts against the Boss himself."


What is Rufus the boss of anyway? He was supposed to be working for the shareholders, we the shareholders do not work for him!!!!

You know what I mean....the point is Ironman "knows of" a private call between Mr Harris and myself. Im curious how.
 
Posted by new2stocks on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by Mr. CATIAEngineer:
quote:
Originally posted by new2stocks:
"You say you protect your sources but spilled your guts against the Boss himself."


What is Rufus the boss of anyway? He was supposed to be working for the shareholders, we the shareholders do not work for him!!!!

You know what I mean....the point is Ironman "knows of" a private call between Mr Harris and myself. Im curious how.
Yep that would be interesting to know. I would also like to know why he feels it necessary to hide who he is. At this point, everyone knows who everyone is.....why this big secret I'm in the know boat stuff again? [Roll Eyes]
 
Posted by Lootcifer on :
 
Wow so many old faces from CSHD. I remember all you guys from last year. Hope it all works out for you all and this battle with Rufus. You all deserve to get some kinda money out of this. I don't post much or trade much anymore but still hold the good advice Chartwalker gave me last year when this thing was flying high. Good luck guys
 
Posted by Ironman64 on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by PCola77:
Ironman, can you answer the simple question of "Will people who have seen their investments in this go from $20,000 to worthless ever see their initial cash outlay again". I don't think many people here are concerned with who gets what punishment as much as they are interested if they will ever see those $$$ again.

I whole-heartedly believe that we will see our money (and then some) as well as CSHD becoming fully reporting again.

Things aren't as they seem....with CSHD and with certain individuals.
 
Posted by Ironman64 on :
 
The topic of "class action lawsuit" will not be brought up again by me.

I have been asked by several good shareholder friends to pull back on that discussion for now, and I will oblige.
 
Posted by T e x on :
 
Fascinating!

Can *not* imagine any shareholder wanting to suppress discussion of any and all options available...

seems counter-intuitive, to me.
 
Posted by Ironman64 on :
 
Speak away "TEX"....

You are welcome to filibuster......but I am not going to discuss the subject at this time.

Make better sense now?
 
Posted by a surfer on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by Ironman64:
quote:
Originally posted by PCola77:
Ironman, can you answer the simple question of "Will people who have seen their investments in this go from $20,000 to worthless ever see their initial cash outlay again". I don't think many people here are concerned with who gets what punishment as much as they are interested if they will ever see those $$$ again.

I whole-heartedly believe that we will see our money (and then some) as well as CSHD becoming fully reporting again.

Things aren't as they seem....with CSHD and with certain individuals.

If this trades again for over 1 buck I will sell all and give the money to a family in need.

Who knows how much this lesson saved me in the long haul.
 
Posted by T e x on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by a surfer:
quote:
Originally posted by Ironman64:
quote:
Originally posted by PCola77:
Ironman, can you answer the simple question of "Will people who have seen their investments in this go from $20,000 to worthless ever see their initial cash outlay again". I don't think many people here are concerned with who gets what punishment as much as they are interested if they will ever see those $$$ again.

I whole-heartedly believe that we will see our money (and then some) as well as CSHD becoming fully reporting again.

Things aren't as they seem....with CSHD and with certain individuals.

If this trades again for over 1 buck I will sell all and give the money to a family in need.

Who knows how much this lesson saved me in the long haul.

yup, that's the "silver lining" on these kinds of plays...

At the risk of boring long-time readers who have heard this before, that's why I follow the GVRPs and CSHDs of the world: I hit GVRP about a month or two into trading, and -- boy, howdy -- did I ever get a ride on the roller-coaster learning curve.

Still say the best thing I ever did as a newbie was not my early "wins" but the "foolish decision" to plop down 50 or 100 bucks on GVRP. That way, I was "invested" enough to have a possible return of somewhere between $15k and $30k.

With that much possible return (which a few Ameritraders realized), man-o-man, I was GLUED to the screen for days!

Perhaps needless to say, I got a quick lesson in DD, the parameters of PRs vs the SEC's powers, and the recognition that you can--even as an adult--talk yourself into going along with hype.

So, ya...as far as I can figure?

We all pay our dues, one way or another.
 
Posted by PCola77 on :
 
Thank you for the honest answer. Would you be willing to further break it out to say whether you believe even those who have since sold will get their money, or just those still holding? And what about people like myself, who bought some on the greys near the current price, would I also be able to sell in the $1+ range, or are you saying this would be more like a disgorgement from those who made money to those who lost??


quote:
Originally posted by Ironman64:
quote:
Originally posted by PCola77:
Ironman, can you answer the simple question of "Will people who have seen their investments in this go from $20,000 to worthless ever see their initial cash outlay again". I don't think many people here are concerned with who gets what punishment as much as they are interested if they will ever see those $$$ again.

I whole-heartedly believe that we will see our money (and then some) as well as CSHD becoming fully reporting again.

Things aren't as they seem....with CSHD and with certain individuals.


 
Posted by Ironman64 on :
 
PCola --

In short, I believe all shareholders, whether holding pre-10/16 or grey shares will benefit when this ride is over.

Now the tricky part....I am not sure what happens to those that have sold pre-10/16 shares. As I recall from discussions with Harris, a shareholder of record at the close on October 16, 2006 is subject to the 6:1 TPR, thus in its purest form even those that have sold after pre-10/16 after 10/16/06 should still have shares at some point in the future. Those shares will hold value as any other share.

Now, one other item. I have never asked this question of anyone that would "know", but I personally feel that a grey share or a pre-10/16 can not be of a separate class, meaning they can't be priced differently. The only difference being the obvious 6:1 award due to a pre-10/16 owner.
 
Posted by PCola77 on :
 
Finally, you and I agree about something. Was curious if you would claim that they would/could be treated differently as I seem to remember Rufus saying in the past.

quote:
Originally posted by Ironman64:
but I personally feel that a grey share or a pre-10/16 can not be of a separate class, meaning they can't be priced differently.


 
Posted by wallymac on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by Ironman64:
PCola --

In short, I believe all shareholders, whether holding pre-10/16 or grey shares will benefit when this ride is over.

Now the tricky part....I am not sure what happens to those that have sold pre-10/16 shares. As I recall from discussions with Harris, a shareholder of record at the close on October 16, 2006 is subject to the 6:1 TPR, thus in its purest form even those that have sold after pre-10/16 after 10/16/06 should still have shares at some point in the future. Those shares will hold value as any other share.

Now, one other item. I have never asked this question of anyone that would "know", but I personally feel that a grey share or a pre-10/16 can not be of a separate class, meaning they can't be priced differently. The only difference being the obvious 6:1 award due to a pre-10/16 owner.

Really, now that's interesting. How would one entail to award shares based on pre 10/16 vs post 10/16? It would be a nightmare and the fact that an Ex date was never determined to award those shares would also present a legal nightmare. But since we are suspending disbelieve here please tells us the logistics of how this could ever be accomplished.
 
Posted by T e x on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by PCola77:
Finally, you and I agree about something. Was curious if you would claim that they would/could be treated differently as I seem to remember Rufus saying in the past.

quote:
Originally posted by Ironman64:
but I personally feel that a grey share or a pre-10/16 can not be of a separate class, meaning they can't be priced differently.


not quite following...

"greys" "pre-10/16s"

etc...

CSHD's entry onto the grey's is fact; the "6:1" divvy is as much a wisp in the wind as PHGI's "Canadian divvy."
 
Posted by Ironman64 on :
 
not a divvy Tex....of course the "other side" wants to call it just that in a futile attempt to foil it cuz of no "ex-div date".

I believe if you examine the PR on 10/16 you will NOT find the word "dividend" but rather TPR.

And as we all know now, the TPR was the event that sent the crooks scrambling to the Atlanta SEC to pull out all stops. And now we wait to see what the ultimate verdict is once things play out.
 
Posted by a surfer on :
 
http://sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/757563/000129707706000068/cshd8ka_09292006.ht m

the S-4 was never filed......correct.?


LOL funny stuff in there.
 
Posted by Ironman64 on :
 
Wally --

I think you will find that once these events play out, a shareholder/NOBO list will be produced that details shareholders of record as of 10/16/06.

Until then, I guess we can debate our collective opinions, but a debate is all it will be.
 
Posted by PCola77 on :
 
Wally and Tex, I hate to go to the dark side on this one, but I was in fact involved in a stock that succeeded in retoractively granting a dividend to holders as of a certain date, even if they had sold the stock after the retroactive date. I believe it was one of the incarnations of AWYB/AWBV/HVLN.
 
Posted by T e x on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by Ironman64:
not a divvy Tex....of course the "other side" wants to call it just that in a futile attempt to foil it cuz of no "ex-div date".

I believe if you examine the PR on 10/16 you will NOT find the word "dividend" but rather TPR.

And as we all know now, the TPR was the event that sent the crooks scrambling to the Atlanta SEC to pull out all stops. And now we wait to see what the ultimate verdict is once things play out.

well, yeah, it *is*...and too many here have now seen that when whatever company it is under discussion "awards" cash or stock, it's still treated the same.

In other words, we (most of us here) do NOT go by PRs but by filings...too many of us have seen even filings with the SEC turn out to be hinky--so we prefer the Daily List on OTCBB, which is the the official site for publication of data from the NASDAQ department I mentioned.

For that 6:1 you mention to take effect? It would have to be filed--there's no "backdating" on such "awards."

The Threshold Price Reset(TPR) has nothing to do with this play--other than the pump--as it *never* qualified. How about this?

Instead of acting out on the "Mr. Mysterious" impulse? Please post the regs under which this qualified for a TPR...
 
Posted by T e x on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by PCola77:
Wally and Tex, I hate to go to the dark side on this one, but I was in fact involved in a stock that succeeded in retoractively granting a dividend to holders as of a certain date, even if they had sold the stock after the retroactive date. I believe it was one of the incarnations of AWYB/AWBV/HVLN.

Jeez, I've never said *everything* follows the rules...

look at Katie Gold...

or GVRP (again)...

But, dadgum--

1) is that something we wanna support? as in legal...

2) is that something we can count on, as traders?

I would prefer consistency, eh?

lol..."dark side"

you're simply posting what you know, I trust.

That's different than trying to "sway" opinion--we always discuss facts as we know them. Sometimes, we don't figure chit out for months on end...

case in point [Roll Eyes]
 
Posted by PCola77 on :
 
Well, just saying there *is* precedent. And as with the rest of you, I'll believe it to happen a second time not a moment before I see it happen again... For some odd reason, I don't trust Rufie to come through on this one either. Maybe his 0-100 in predictions has biased me though [Big Grin]

quote:
Originally posted by T e x:
quote:
Originally posted by PCola77:
Wally and Tex, I hate to go to the dark side on this one, but I was in fact involved in a stock that succeeded in retoractively granting a dividend to holders as of a certain date, even if they had sold the stock after the retroactive date. I believe it was one of the incarnations of AWYB/AWBV/HVLN.

Jeez, I've never said *everything* follows the rules...

look at Katie Gold...

or GVRP (again)...

But, dadgum--

1) is that something we wanna support? as in legal...

2) is that something we can count on, as traders?

I would prefer consistency, eh?

lol..."dark side"

you're simply posting what you know, I trust.

That's different than trying to "sway" opinion--we always discuss facts as we know them. Sometimes, we don't figure chit out for months on end...

case in point [Roll Eyes]


 
Posted by wallymac on :
 
There is no precedent for a TPR, since it has do with issues that are other than common stock. This isn't to say that it couldn't happen but at this time there is no precedent for it.

As, Tex, Says how are we as retail traders to understand the ground rules if they consistently change.

I would rather trade under rules that are constant, at least then I know the rules, than trade under constantly changing rules that benefit people other than the retail traders that stand to lose the most.

Why do I say that retail traders stand to lose the most? Because the changes always seem to benefit anyone other than the retail trader.
 
Posted by Ironman64 on :
 
One more time guys:

The crooks, including the SEC, were fine with what CSHD was doing as long as the 6:1 was called a dividend. The moment it was pr'd and 8k'd as a TPR, all hell broke loose.

We wouldn't be where we are now otherwise. Once the events going on behind the scenes right now play out, it will all be obvious.
 
Posted by new2stocks on :
 
So what's going on "behind the scenes" ? Why can't you tell us?
 
Posted by T e x on :
 
One more time, guy--

I'm sure the SEC *did* have problems with the 6-for-1: no matter how you count the tail, a dog's still got only four legs. Although, as I recall, that wasn't mentioned in either the suspension notice or the complaint. I *suspect* they were holding it in reserve in case they decided a second suspension were necesssary...but that's pure speculation.

Anyway, as previously requested, why don't you simply post the pertinent regs that allow such a "TPR" ?
 
Posted by new2stocks on :
 
Ok, what is the difference between a TPR and a dividend? I'm a bit confused. TIA [Smile]
 
Posted by Ironman64 on :
 
I think a better question, TEX, is why don't you show me a "pertinent reg" that disallows it.

And like you said, absent of your speculation...."that wasn't mentioned in either the suspension notice or the complaint". Very interesting, huh?

Like I said last night, we can debate this crap to death. In the end it will all come clean. Mark my words.
 
Posted by T e x on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by new2stocks:
Ok, what is the difference between a TPR and a dividend? I'm a bit confused. TIA [Smile]

Threshold Price Reset
 
Posted by new2stocks on :
 
I know what TPR stands for, but what is the difference between the two? According to Ironman the reason all hell broke loose was because it was pr'd & 8k'd as a TPR, not a dividend.
 
Posted by 10of13 on :
 
Well heck...I can hardly wait to get those 6 shares that are worth .002 or what ever this might be trading at...I may just have enough money for McDonalds...whoo hooo...

Ironman...it's great you "have the faith"...but keep it real...this was a scam...and the company and ALL players were full of the brown stuff...
for those new peeps reading...stay far away from this stock...there is nothing to gain...read the threads...learn the lessons...BUT don't buy the stock!!!

Great to see familiar faces!!! [Wink]
quote:
Originally posted by Ironman64:
Wally --

I think you will find that once these events play out, a shareholder/NOBO list will be produced that details shareholders of record as of 10/16/06.

Until then, I guess we can debate our collective opinions, but a debate is all it will be.


 
Posted by T e x on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by new2stocks:
I know what TPR stands for, but what is the difference between the two? According to Ironman the reason all hell broke loose was because it was pr'd & 8k'd as a TPR, not a dividend.

Well, obviously, I won't speak for someone else, but as I take his message, he's saying that pulling off a "threshold price reset" with shares of common stock would be a stunning coup because the pps would not adjust as in a divvy-split...hence, the $15 equivalent.

I do remember looking up "threshold price reset" back in the day, and I found something relevant to IRS regs, but not SEC regs. I read over 'em pretty carefully, but never found a scenario that applied here. Unfortunately, I bookmarked that link on another hard drive that's no good anymore, and have never been able to find it since...

If you Google "threshold price reset" now--all in quotes-- *every* hit is about CSHD... ie, no other company, no regs, no nada:

http://www.google.com/search?q=%22threshold+Price+Reset%22&num=100&hl=en&safe=of f&client=firefox-a&rls=org.mozilla:en-US:official&hs=ASk&filter=0
 
Posted by T e x on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by 10of13:
Well heck...I can hardly wait to get those 6 shares that are worth .002 or what ever this might be trading at...I may just have enough money for McDonalds...whoo hooo...

Ironman...it's great you "have the faith"...but keep it real...this was a scam...and the company and ALL players were full of the brown stuff...
for those new peeps reading...stay far away from this stock...there is nothing to gain...read the threads...learn the lessons...BUT don't buy the stock!!!

Great to see familiar faces!!! [Wink]
quote:
Originally posted by Ironman64:
Wally --

I think you will find that once these events play out, a shareholder/NOBO list will be produced that details shareholders of record as of 10/16/06.

Until then, I guess we can debate our collective opinions, but a debate is all it will be.


Hullo, 10 [Smile]

How's everything your way? Kids must really be getting big now, I bet...
 
Posted by Ironman64 on :
 
Bill and his wife Sabrina have lived in Pearland, Texas for about 3 years now.

Bill works for Calpine in downton Houston. On this particular day, Bill has had a rough day at work. On top of that he has to run an errand on his way home from his job. Before he leaves the office at 5:00 p.m., he calls Sabrina and tells her he will be home at 7:00 p.m., after his errand is complete. At 5:25 p.m., as Bill is driving south on SH-288 a car swerves into his lane, collides with him, which causes a horrific crash. As police and ambulances arrive, Bill is pulled from his car, unconscious, but alive. He is rushed to a local hospital. As you might expect, 7:00 p.m. comes and goes without Bill arriving home to his wife Sabrina.

Question: Did Bill lie to Sabrina by not arriving home at 7:00 p.m......If no, then why?
 
Posted by T e x on :
 
silly...

the analogy would be more like Bill promised to be home by 7 pm--with a trunk full of diamonds...that somehow "disappeared" in the wreck.
 
Posted by Ironman64 on :
 
Of course Tex, wouldn't expect anything less from you. Goes back to what is your angle here question a few days back.

But, heck, lets play with your distorted answer. So, who has the diamonds now? Bob or Bill? Since the only one selling diamonds on the block is....BOB.

Hmmmm.....
 
Posted by bilgert on :
 
I hate these friggin tales, allegories and contorted metaphors. They add nothing.
 
Posted by a surfer on :
 
you sure that its not Sabra Dabbs in your story above...


What happened to her shares Ironman??
 
Posted by Ironman64 on :
 
Based on the majority of posts here on Allstocks, I think a lot of people are gonna be floored how this story ends.
 
Posted by new2stocks on :
 
Ok I'll ask again.... [Roll Eyes] Ironman, why can't you just tell us what is going on or how this is going to end? Why all the riddles and guessing games?
 
Posted by Ironman64 on :
 
New2stocks --

I can say this:

* There are a lot of crooks associated with our stock, but Harris is not on that list.
* Harris/CSHD is not alone in its fight against injustice.
* Very powerful people and agencies are not only aware of our situation, but involved in the solution.
* Like the dangerous currents in a peaceful looking river, lots of things are going on below the surface.
* If you trust anyone other than Harris, you are likely either uninformed or part of the problem.
* Indicting, judging and sentencing Harris on a message board even while a Federal Court hasn't done so is a VERY foolish exercise.
* People with ulterior motives and those living in fear populate all message boards.
* Never guess the ending of a book before the final chapter is complete unless you are the author or had a hand in writing the book.
 
Posted by JERSEYHAWG on :
 
1ST TIME POSTER,,,,,,AN INTRODUCTION

HELLO TO ALL, YOU HAVE A VERY GOOD THREAD GOING ON HERE. SOME OF YOU KNOW ME AND MOST OF YOU DONT. I WAS TOLD ABOUT YOUR THREAD AND CAME OVER TO TAKE A LOOK. I REALLY ENJOY READING YOUR COMMENTS ON CSHD. LOOKING FORWARD TO READING WHAT YOU FOLKS SAY.
WISH A GOOD DAY TO EVERYONE HERE
 
Posted by glassman on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by Ironman64:
Based on the majority of posts here on Allstocks, I think a lot of people are gonna be floored how this story ends.

some of us have seen it all, enough with the flirting. put up or shutup (i mean that in a nice way [Big Grin] )
 
Posted by Ironman64 on :
 
Seen it all? Perhaps you think so, but I think you will re-define that statement at a later date.
 
Posted by new2stocks on :
 
New2stocks --

I can say this:

* There are a lot of crooks associated with our stock, but Harris is not on that list. What makes you so sure of that? Where is your proof?
* Harris/CSHD is not alone in its fight against injustice.
* Very powerful people and agencies are not only aware of our situation, but involved in the solution. Again, where is proof of this claim?
* Like the dangerous currents in a peaceful looking river, lots of things are going on below the surface.
* If you trust anyone other than Harris, you are likely either uninformed or part of the problem. That is absurd.
* Indicting, judging and sentencing Harris on a message board even while a Federal Court hasn't done so is a VERY foolish exercise. Everyone has a right to their opinion I guess.[
* People with ulterior motives and those living in fear populate all message boards.
* Never guess the ending of a book before the final chapter is complete unless you are the author or had a hand in writing the book. So you must be either the author or have a hand in writing the CSHD book then since you are leading us to believe that you know how this is going to end! Come on, enough with the BS!!!
 
Posted by glassman on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by Ironman64:
Seen it all? Perhaps you think so, but I think you will re-define that statement at a later date.

gladly [Wink]
 
Posted by new2stocks on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by Ironman64:
Seen it all? Perhaps you think so, but I think you will re-define that statement at a later date.

What makes you think that?
 
Posted by new2stocks on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by JERSEYHAWG:
1ST TIME POSTER,,,,,,AN INTRODUCTION

HELLO TO ALL, YOU HAVE A VERY GOOD THREAD GOING ON HERE. SOME OF YOU KNOW ME AND MOST OF YOU DONT. I WAS TOLD ABOUT YOUR THREAD AND CAME OVER TO TAKE A LOOK. I REALLY ENJOY READING YOUR COMMENTS ON CSHD. LOOKING FORWARD TO READING WHAT YOU FOLKS SAY.
WISH A GOOD DAY TO EVERYONE HERE

Why are you shouting? lol
 
Posted by Ironman64 on :
 
I have never stated that I know everything about CSHD, exactly how it will end, when it will end. And for those that want all that, think on this. If Harris himself hasn't spoken that information, then how in the world can/will I do it?

What I can say is that things aren't as they seem. I know that for a fact and will not expound on it. As I said earlier, I have been around for more of this ride than most here, so just because I just started posting now doesn't make me a CSHD newbie. I have formed countless friendships, just as any here could have, with individuals that have entrusted pieces of the puzzle with me. If you had these pieces and were asked to keep the details confidential, you would do the same as I.

If you choose not to trust me, that is your call, I have a thick skin. But, for those that have asked if I think this will still turn out well for us, I have answered in an honest manner and said all that I can.
 
Posted by harpeter on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by Ironman64:
I have never stated that I know everything about CSHD, exactly how it will end, when it will end. And for those that want all that, think on this. If Harris himself hasn't spoken that information, then how in the world can/will I do it?

What I can say is that things aren't as they seem. I know that for a fact and will not expound on it. As I said earlier, I have been around for more of this ride than most here, so just because I just started posting now doesn't make me a CSHD newbie. I have formed countless friendships, just as any here could have, with individuals that have entrusted pieces of the puzzle with me. If you had these pieces and were asked to keep the details confidential, you would do the same as I.

If you choose not to trust me, that is your call, I have a thick skin. But, for those that have asked if I think this will still turn out well for us, I have answered in an honest manner and said all that I can.

Are you still posting from the library?
 
Posted by Mr. CATIAEngineer on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by JERSEYHAWG:
1ST TIME POSTER,,,,,,AN INTRODUCTION

HELLO TO ALL, YOU HAVE A VERY GOOD THREAD GOING ON HERE. SOME OF YOU KNOW ME AND MOST OF YOU DONT. I WAS TOLD ABOUT YOUR THREAD AND CAME OVER TO TAKE A LOOK. I REALLY ENJOY READING YOUR COMMENTS ON CSHD. LOOKING FORWARD TO READING WHAT YOU FOLKS SAY.
WISH A GOOD DAY TO EVERYONE HERE

HAWWWWWWG! [Smile]

Welcome to the board mi amigo!
 
Posted by new2stocks on :
 
With all do respect Ironman, in one of your recent posts you stated, " I think a lot of people are gonna be floored how this story ends." Which to me suggests that you know how this is going to end or you would like us all to think you know how this will end. Why come in here and stir up a bee's nest and not give proof of your claims? If this is all your opinion, then state it as such, not as fact. If it is fact then you need to support your claims with proof. The shareholders have been put through enough BS in the last 2 years.....enough is enough. IMO [Smile]
 
Posted by glassman on :
 
If you choose not to trust me, that is your call, I have a thick skin. But, for those that have asked if I think this will still turn out well for us, I have answered in an honest manner and said all that I can.

yawn, do you know how many people i trust? LOL

furthermore? the first time somebody EVER feels compelled to tell me to trust them? i don't. EOM
 
Posted by new2stocks on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by harpeter:
quote:
Originally posted by Ironman64:
I have never stated that I know everything about CSHD, exactly how it will end, when it will end. And for those that want all that, think on this. If Harris himself hasn't spoken that information, then how in the world can/will I do it?

What I can say is that things aren't as they seem. I know that for a fact and will not expound on it. As I said earlier, I have been around for more of this ride than most here, so just because I just started posting now doesn't make me a CSHD newbie. I have formed countless friendships, just as any here could have, with individuals that have entrusted pieces of the puzzle with me. If you had these pieces and were asked to keep the details confidential, you would do the same as I.

If you choose not to trust me, that is your call, I have a thick skin. But, for those that have asked if I think this will still turn out well for us, I have answered in an honest manner and said all that I can.

Are you still posting from the library?
LMAO!!!
 
Posted by Ironman64 on :
 
Hilarious....if I were Griff. [Wink]
 
Posted by harpeter on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by Ironman64:
Hilarious....if I were Griff. [Wink]

I didn't mention Griffs name when I asked you that. Apparently you know of our Griff that talks like you. I have read all of your posts since you have been here. If I was a betting man, I would put all my chips in that you are Griff or one of his CLONES. [Smile]
 
Posted by Mr. CATIAEngineer on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by Ironman64:
I have never stated that I know everything about CSHD, exactly how it will end, when it will end. And for those that want all that, think on this. If Harris himself hasn't spoken that information, then how in the world can/will I do it?

What I can say is that things aren't as they seem. I know that for a fact and will not expound on it. As I said earlier, I have been around for more of this ride than most here, so just because I just started posting now doesn't make me a CSHD newbie. I have formed countless friendships, just as any here could have, with individuals that have entrusted pieces of the puzzle with me. If you had these pieces and were asked to keep the details confidential, you would do the same as I.

If you choose not to trust me, that is your call, I have a thick skin. But, for those that have asked if I think this will still turn out well for us, I have answered in an honest manner and said all that I can.

If CSHD is going to turn out ok then there is no reason to continue with this banter right? Just let it play out IMO. No one is suggesting buying OR selling so whats the point of arguing what you do or do not know?

This thread has been lingering for MONTHS, waiting on some real news. I have no idea why that had to change. [Confused]

After 2 years on this ride I have grown tired of "new faces" shouting their opinions across public forums.

Oh, and you may not be a CSHD newbie but by using a new alias that impression is given. Had you just come in here with a name people would recognize maybe you would have gotten a different response. But hey, what do I know? [Smile]
 
Posted by glassman on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by Mr. CATIAEngineer:
[If CSHD is going to turn out ok then there is no reason to continue with this banter right? Just let it play out IMO. No one is suggesting buying OR selling so whats the point of arguing what you do or do not know?

could'n'a said it better myself...
 
Posted by Ocqueoc on :
 
A big welcome to Jersey and Harp!! [Smile]
 
Posted by harpeter on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by Ocqueoc:
A big welcome to Jersey and Harp!! [Smile]

Thanks for the welcome. The talk about Ironman being here got my interest up to come see what the fortune teller was saying.
 
Posted by Mr. CATIAEngineer on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by harpeter:
quote:
Originally posted by Ocqueoc:
A big welcome to Jersey and Harp!! [Smile]

Thanks for the welcome. The talk about Ironman being here got my interest up to come see what the fortune teller was saying.
Hey and Harp too....welcome [Smile]
 
Posted by Ironman64 on :
 
Mr. Cat --

It appears that we have but one thing in common these days.....we have both had personal conversations with Paul.

The odd thing about that is that anyone that has spoken to him and discussed anything of substance would come away with what? Would it be a sour or rosey view of our future? The truth of the matter is this -- Paul should not be the target of any shareholder anger, but since most shareholders can't get their mitts on the true crooks...Heck, Harris gets to take the brunt of the attack. Next, I can tell you that Harris, if posting here would agree with most, if not all, of the content of my posts. I am not saying you have personally made any negative posts about Harris, but you do seem to support an environment for doing so.

My initial reason for coming here to post was due to comments about Harris and/or CSHD here. One thing I think Harris would say to me is that it is an exercise in futility, the balance of keeping the mood up by posting without divulging info that could harm the outcome.

I do not bear any ill will to any honest shareholders that post here. However, I know there are others here that have or will have significant legal problems in front of them due to their crooked past in this stock. To those, my wish is the justice system shows no leniency for what you have tried to do to honest people.
 
Posted by new2stocks on :
 
Ironman, In your opinion, who do you believe are the true crooks? Dave Perley? Mike Alexander???
 
Posted by Sandusky on :
 
If I were entrusted with confidential details I wouldn't be on the board posting "I have info you don't have but don't ask me what it is" statements. At least not without expecting the kind of response you've gotten. This was boring 18 months ago.

quote:
Originally posted by Ironman64:
I have never stated that I know everything about CSHD, exactly how it will end, when it will end. And for those that want all that, think on this. If Harris himself hasn't spoken that information, then how in the world can/will I do it?

What I can say is that things aren't as they seem. I know that for a fact and will not expound on it. As I said earlier, I have been around for more of this ride than most here, so just because I just started posting now doesn't make me a CSHD newbie. I have formed countless friendships, just as any here could have, with individuals that have entrusted pieces of the puzzle with me. If you had these pieces and were asked to keep the details confidential, you would do the same as I.

If you choose not to trust me, that is your call, I have a thick skin. But, for those that have asked if I think this will still turn out well for us, I have answered in an honest manner and said all that I can.


 
Posted by Ironman64 on :
 
I have heard things about Perley that would make one shudder, but does that really surprise anyone? Things that belong in a Joe Pesci movie.
 
Posted by Mr. CATIAEngineer on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by glassman:
quote:
Originally posted by Mr. CATIAEngineer:
[If CSHD is going to turn out ok then there is no reason to continue with this banter right? Just let it play out IMO. No one is suggesting buying OR selling so whats the point of arguing what you do or do not know?

could'n'a said it better myself...
Howdy. I tried to PM you yesterday but your inbox was full. I dropped you an email instead.

Good to see ya...I hope all is well with ya
 
Posted by T e x on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by Ironman64:
Of course Tex, wouldn't expect anything less from you. Goes back to what is your angle here question a few days back.

But, heck, lets play with your distorted answer. So, who has the diamonds now? Bob or Bill? Since the only one selling diamonds on the block "is....BOB.

Hmmmm.....

distorted? How so?

Who's still selling?

"Where did it go?" How would I know? All I know is Alexander claimed about 6 to 7 million$ in filings...

I know who *doesn't* have it...
 
Posted by Mr. CATIAEngineer on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by Ironman64:
Mr. Cat --

It appears that we have but one thing in common these days.....we have both had personal conversations with Paul.

The odd thing about that is that anyone that has spoken to him and discussed anything of substance would come away with what? Would it be a sour or rosey view of our future? The truth of the matter is this -- Paul should not be the target of any shareholder anger, but since most shareholders can't get their mitts on the true crooks...Heck, Harris gets to take the brunt of the attack. Next, I can tell you that Harris, if posting here would agree with most, if not all, of the content of my posts. I am not saying you have personally made any negative posts about Harris, but you do seem to support an environment for doing so.

My initial reason for coming here to post was due to comments about Harris and/or CSHD here. One thing I think Harris would say to me is that it is an exercise in futility, the balance of keeping the mood up by posting without divulging info that could harm the outcome.

I do not bear any ill will to any honest shareholders that post here. However, I know there are others here that have or will have significant legal problems in front of them due to their crooked past in this stock. To those, my wish is the justice system shows no leniency for what you have tried to do to honest people.

"I am not saying you have personally made any negative posts about Harris, but you do seem to support an environment for doing so."

See now thats what I call a spin.

I TRY to support an environment where facts are facts and opinions are left at the door. Im not always successful and I let emotion and opinion come into play too often but what I "seem" to support is not up for discussion, especially with someone that I have no history on....yet you can go back 2 years in my history if you want.

What I do not support is arguing with a few bashers that stop in the thread once in a blue moon and spout off some remark that quite honestly doesnt bother me, and shouldnt bother RPH either IMO. If you go back through this thread, and the several before it, you will see that we all fought the bashers when we felt it was necessary and eventually decided it was no longer worth our time.

You say you came here due to comments about Harris and CSHD...did you look at how many pages there had been since January? Take another look now and see what YOU have done. The bashing had basically come to an end other than a post every other week or so, now you have brought attention back to this thread.

I find it interesting that you feel you can speak for Harris, how he would agree with your posts....and so on. Those are bold statements from just a fellow shareholder. Yes, you and I have spoken with Paul. I spoke with him 3 different times. Did I leave the discussion with a sour or rosey view of our future? Neither, because i did NOT discuss anything of "substance" with him. I felt it would be foolish to do so being that the substance could be considered insider info.
 
Posted by Ironman64 on :
 
Please don't play the "insider info" card. Do you fully understand that possessing insider information is no crime? Do you realize the moment it becomes a problem is when someone trades on it. I highly doubt that anyone here is thinking of selling their shares when they are trading at this level.

Regarding this thread, it is comical that a message board is a forum for discussing the subject matter for the particular thread...Yet, you blame me for people focusing on this thread, coming here to do just that. Uh----ok.

Like I said before, although we both claim to be long shareholders, we really don't agree on much about CSHD, it appears.
 
Posted by glassman on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by Ironman64:
Please don't play the "insider info" card. Do you fully understand that possessing insider information is no crime? Do you realize the moment it becomes a problem is when someone trades on it. I highly doubt that anyone here is thinking of selling their shares when they are trading at this level.


some people prefer to remain above doubt.

and? once you KNOW insider info, can you trade at all?
tricky questions that some of US who have seen much do know to ask.

you're just muck raking.
 
Posted by Mr. CATIAEngineer on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by Ironman64:
Please don't play the "insider info" card. Do you fully understand that possessing insider information is no crime? Do you realize the moment it becomes a problem is when someone trades on it. I highly doubt that anyone here is thinking of selling their shares when they are trading at this level.

Regarding this thread, it is comical that a message board is a forum for discussing the subject matter for the particular thread...Yet, you blame me for people focusing on this thread, coming here to do just that. Uh----ok.

Like I said before, although we both claim to be long shareholders, we really don't agree on much about CSHD, it appears.

Actually we dont agree on your reasons for posting here...you really dont seem to know my opinion on CSHD.

Someday when you choose to take off that mask you are wearing maybe we can truly discuss our opinions. Obviously MOST of us do live behind an alias...but MOST of us keep that alias. Ironman from Nowhereville leads me to believe you either dont want someone to know your past or you dont want them to know your future. In either case its dodgy IMO.
 
Posted by Ironman64 on :
 
And Mr. Cat, I respect your right to an opinion....about CSHD and about me. Time will tell which of us talked out of our hind end.
 
Posted by IrishLife2 on :
 
Hummmm? Is this the new Channel 6?? LMAO I see a Cult following starting. Seems we have a Dufus or Griff clone posting here!

Hi Dirt and Harp!!
 
Posted by Ocqueoc on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by Ironman64:
And Mr. Cat, I respect your right to an opinion....about CSHD and about me. Time will tell which of us talked out of our hind end.

IMO, unless you have read the last two years of the threads on here, or Mr.C's, posts ( all of them)
How can you base any opinion on Mr.C's posts?

As far as talking out of your hind end, well, you said it, not us!!
 
Posted by Mr. CATIAEngineer on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by IrishLife2:
Hummmm? Is the the new Channel 6?? LMAO I see a Cult following starting. Seems we have a Dufus or Griff clone in our mist!

Hi Dirt and Harp!!

There goes the neighborhood [Razz]

I doubt you will see a cult following start up here. We try to keep it real over here these days. A person can be Pro-CSHD without the unnecessary Tutisms and Griffisms....IMO of course. [Wink]

Welcome to the board....

Peace
 
Posted by Mr. CATIAEngineer on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by Ocqueoc:
quote:
Originally posted by Ironman64:
And Mr. Cat, I respect your right to an opinion....about CSHD and about me. Time will tell which of us talked out of our hind end.

IMO, unless you have read the last two years of the threads on here, or Mr.C's, posts ( all of them)
How can you base any opinion on Mr.C's posts?

As far as talking out of your hind end, well, you said it, not us!!

Better question, how can I have an opinion of Ironman when I dont even know who that is? [Confused]
 
Posted by IrishLife2 on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by Mr. CATIAEngineer:
quote:
Originally posted by IrishLife2:
Hummmm? Is this the new Channel 6?? LMAO I see a Cult following starting. Seems we have a Dufus or Griff clone posting here!

Hi Dirt and Harp!!

There goes the neighborhood [Razz]

I doubt you will see a cult following start up here. We try to keep it real over here these days. A person can be Pro-CSHD without the unnecessary Tutisms and Griffisms....IMO of course. [Wink]

Welcome to the board....

Peace

What a relief!! And, thank you for the kind welcome! <smiling>
 
Posted by PCola77 on :
 
Hey Ironman, you said you don't know when this will end. What about a range, like in the next 6 months or 5+ years from now?
 
Posted by Ironman64 on :
 
PCola --

Like I said before, all my posts/comments have been honest and forthright. And I will say upfront, no one knows when this journey is going to be over. The only person involved with CSHD that might have a clue is Paul. Whether he absolutely does or doesn't is unclear. I honestly think that we are not alone in this fight, which likely makes Paul not in full control of the fight against the crooks. We are merely in line waiting for this an event or series of events to break this thing loose. With that said, I do not look for this to move significantly until at Election time or shortly thereafter. THIS IS JUST MY VIEW IN LIGHT OF THE THINGS I HAVE OBSERVED. No one has ever told me a timeline and I have never asked.

Hope this helps some.
 
Posted by T e x on :
 
lol, regardless of why you came, you sure post some funny stuff...will bold what strikes me, personally:

quote:
I honestly think that we are not alone in this fight, which likely makes Paul not in full control of the fight against the crooks.
That's too, too rich...

quote:
My initial reason for coming here to post was due to comments about Harris and/or CSHD here. One thing I think Harris would say to me is that it is an exercise in futility, the balance of keeping the mood up by posting without divulging info that could harm the outcome.
Now, look, before you lump me in with folks who get all bent about "paid bashers" or "paid pumpers" ... you gotta concede that *almost* sounds like a "job description." C'mon, now--am *not* saying anybody sent you over here...it's just funny how you phrase some of the stuff you do...

You ever find those regs on "Threshold Price Reset"?

As I recall now, what I found was by Googling "tax free reorganization" + IRS tax code, then some combo of (Threshold) (Price Reset).
 
Posted by Ironman64 on :
 
Tex --

As I recall, I responded to your post already....re-read it and print it if need be. You find the REG that prohibits it if you are so hot to trot on that. After all, you are hung up on the TPR just like the crooks. Right?

And, BTW, your post earlier about Alexander and shares pretty much summed it up on your stance. Right where we thought you were lined up.
 
Posted by T e x on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by Ironman64:
Tex --

As I recall, I responded to your post already....re-read it and print it if need be. You find the REG that prohibits it if you are so hot to trot on that. After all, you are hung up on the TPR just like the crooks. Right?

And, BTW, your post earlier about Alexander and shares pretty much summed it up on your stance. Right where we thought you were lined up.

me!

lol, YOU said the TPR is what raised Hell...If I were in your position, ie, advocating that TPR is a legit technique/tactic/whatever...MAN O MAN! I'd have those links at my fingertips, ready to trot out for anyone to read...

No, dude, I know a divvy is a divvy--and you gotta give folks advance notice, including NASDAQ.

By the way? Who is "we"? Can't you/they read the filings? You disagree he raked off about 6 to 7 million dollars U$D?
 
Posted by Ironman64 on :
 
And I was always told that everything was bigger and better in Texas. hmmmm....

The Atlanta SEC wants Harris gone so bad they can taste it. Rather than come up with some lame excuse as you did earlier today by saying the SEC is saving the TPR issue as an "ace in the hole", you know better than that. They want him gone, bye-bye, whatever it takes, and they would have already used it if it were an issue. Several of us have talked to Alana and company along the way, it isn't hard to see they want this over oh so bad. So, no cigar on that one.

Everyone has seen those filings....late as they were. Perley, Alexander and no doubt many others have a whole lot splaining to do, no doubt. Wonder why Perley, Alexander, Gee, and company have been so quiet as of late????
 
Posted by harpeter on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by T e x:
quote:
Originally posted by Ironman64:
Tex --

As I recall, I responded to your post already....re-read it and print it if need be. You find the REG that prohibits it if you are so hot to trot on that. After all, you are hung up on the TPR just like the crooks. Right?

And, BTW, your post earlier about Alexander and shares pretty much summed it up on your stance. Right where we thought you were lined up.

me!

lol, YOU said the TPR is what raised Hell...If I were in your position, ie, advocating that TPR is a legit technique/tactic/whatever...MAN O MAN! I'd have those links at my fingertips, ready to trot out for anyone to read...

No, dude, I know a divvy is a divvy--and you gotta give folks advance notice, including NASDAQ.

By the way? Who is "we"? Can't you/they read the filings? You disagree he raked off about 6 to 7 million dollars U$D?

Tex, the only thing that bothers me about the TPR was at the time Rufus PR'ed it, there wasn't enough shares in the authorized shares to accomodate the extra 6 shares that were to be issued. Someone said that Rufus was going to make that his next filing. I think that was said by Rufus on the radio or that conference call he had.
 
Posted by a surfer on :
 
Now your getting somewhere.

I feel like we are getting to the scene in the end of the movie, A few Good Men, when Nicholson says....You want the truth....you Can't handle the truth.
 
Posted by Ironman64 on :
 
San Antonio looks to be putting up a fight....might give the Lakers some resistence tonight.

Looking forward to a possible Celtics/Lakers final.
 
Posted by T e x on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by harpeter:
quote:
Originally posted by T e x:
quote:
Originally posted by Ironman64:
Tex --

As I recall, I responded to your post already....re-read it and print it if need be. You find the REG that prohibits it if you are so hot to trot on that. After all, you are hung up on the TPR just like the crooks. Right?

And, BTW, your post earlier about Alexander and shares pretty much summed it up on your stance. Right where we thought you were lined up.

me!

lol, YOU said the TPR is what raised Hell...If I were in your position, ie, advocating that TPR is a legit technique/tactic/whatever...MAN O MAN! I'd have those links at my fingertips, ready to trot out for anyone to read...

No, dude, I know a divvy is a divvy--and you gotta give folks advance notice, including NASDAQ.

By the way? Who is "we"? Can't you/they read the filings? You disagree he raked off about 6 to 7 million dollars U$D?

Tex, the only thing that bothers me about the TPR was at the time Rufus PR'ed it, there wasn't enough shares in the authorized shares to accomodate the extra 6 shares that were to be issued. Someone said that Rufus was going to make that his next filing. I think that was said by Rufus on the radio or that conference call he had.
Hello, Harpeter,

Nice to see another new "face"...

If I knew that about share-count, I had forgotten it. I haven't followed every twist-n-turn on this thing; was following early, then was in-n-out quite a bit that fall.

Anyway, what bothered me was two-fold: first, given the date range of the PR(s?) and the announced, let's say, "effective date," I could not see how the paperwork could get to NASDAQ abd cleared in time to make the date; second, if there *was* an end-run around it being a divvy/split, I could not find any regs to support it. On the contrary, what I found was something to the effect that "less than full disclosure on any cash or stock distribution" is considered manipulative.

That's good to know about the share structure, though. Do you know whether the share structure you consider "genuine" can be verified? Or is that one of those "he said, she said" controversies? In other words, do the various camps agree that A/S would have needed to be increased in order to accommodate the 6-for-1?
 
Posted by Ironman64 on :
 
Muhahaha.....
 
Posted by frank021474 on :
 
Jenna you have a PM

Hello everyone- just drive by to say hi and check out the banter [Wink]
 
Posted by T e x on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by Ironman64:
And I was always told that everything was bigger and better in Texas. hmmmm....

The Atlanta SEC wants Harris gone so bad they can taste it. Rather than come up with some lame excuse as you did earlier today by saying the SEC is saving the TPR issue as an "ace in the hole", you know better than that. They want him gone, bye-bye, whatever it takes, and they would have already used it if it were an issue. Several of us have talked to Alana and company along the way, it isn't hard to see they want this over oh so bad. So, no cigar on that one.

Everyone has seen those filings....late as they were. Perley, Alexander and no doubt many others have a whole lot splaining to do, no doubt. Wonder why Perley, Alexander, Gee, and company have been so quiet as of late????

Have you been diagnosed with...something?

Judging by your inability to respond to points made, I'm guessing some form of adult attention-deficit disorder.

If so, please don't be so self-conscious--we'll adjust. The best thing is to just come out with it, ya know what I mean? Lol, get this--we had one dude on the board who claimed to be able to speak/post only in third-person. Now, that guy was a trip...But some really enjoyed his posts. Like Denny Crane says, "Hope Springs A Kernel!"
 
Posted by Ironman64 on :
 
Way to address the issues Tex.

Mighty fine, partner.
 
Posted by Ironman64 on :
 
BTW, have you really made 18,307 posts?

In all honesty....who needs the diagnosis?
 
Posted by TimW on :
 
Paul doesn't know sh*. Stop by his office over here in mesa and ask him yourself.
 
Posted by Ironman64 on :
 
Poetter?

The Paul some of us have been discussing today is Rufus Paul Harris.
 
Posted by harpeter on :
 
Hello, Harpeter,

Nice to see another new "face"...

If I knew that about share-count, I had forgotten it. I haven't followed every twist-n-turn on this thing; was following early, then was in-n-out quite a bit that fall.

Anyway, what bothered me was two-fold: first, given the date range of the PR(s?) and the announced, let's say, "effective date," I could not see how the paperwork could get to NASDAQ abd cleared in time to make the date; second, if there *was* an end-run around it being a divvy/split, I could not find any regs to support it. On the contrary, what I found was something to the effect that "less than full disclosure on any cash or stock distribution" is considered manipulative.

That's good to know about the share structure, though. Do you know whether the share structure you consider "genuine" can be verified? Or is that one of those "he said, she said" controversies? In other words, do the various camps agree that A/S would have needed to be increased in order to accommodate the 6-for-1?

Tex, I'm going by the last filing that gave the A/S and when you compare the O/S at the time of the announcement, there wouldn't be enough shares to accomodate the 6:1. Now to throw a monkey wrench in the game, Rufus said the O/S was bought up at the time of the merger. So how can millions of shares have been traded since the merger. Makes you go hmmmm
 
Posted by T e x on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by Ironman64:
BTW, have you really made 18,307 posts?

In all honesty....who needs the diagnosis?

DOH!

18, 308, now... [BadOne]


Seriously? That was my gentle attempt to remind you to stay on focus. You'll have a better time here if you don't "bob n weave" so much. Most of the core members here are sincerely interested in genuine dialogue.

Just a hedzup...
 
Posted by T e x on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by TimW:
Paul doesn't know sh*. Stop by his office over here in mesa and ask him yourself.

Please explain. Who has an office there? What's the office for? a named business?
 
Posted by T e x on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by harpeter:
Hello, Harpeter,

Nice to see another new "face"...

If I knew that about share-count, I had forgotten it. I haven't followed every twist-n-turn on this thing; was following early, then was in-n-out quite a bit that fall.

Anyway, what bothered me was two-fold: first, given the date range of the PR(s?) and the announced, let's say, "effective date," I could not see how the paperwork could get to NASDAQ abd cleared in time to make the date; second, if there *was* an end-run around it being a divvy/split, I could not find any regs to support it. On the contrary, what I found was something to the effect that "less than full disclosure on any cash or stock distribution" is considered manipulative.

That's good to know about the share structure, though. Do you know whether the share structure you consider "genuine" can be verified? Or is that one of those "he said, she said" controversies? In other words, do the various camps agree that A/S would have needed to be increased in order to accommodate the 6-for-1?

Tex, I'm going by the last filing that gave the A/S and when you compare the O/S at the time of the announcement, there wouldn't be enough shares to accomodate the 6:1. Now to throw a monkey wrench in the game, Rufus said the O/S was bought up at the time of the merger. So how can millions of shares have been traded since the merger. Makes you go hmmmm

man, I have no idea...

are you saying Harris believed there was a problem with the share structure but he went ahead and announced the 6-for-1?
 
Posted by harpeter on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by T e x:
quote:
Originally posted by harpeter:
Hello, Harpeter,

Nice to see another new "face"...

If I knew that about share-count, I had forgotten it. I haven't followed every twist-n-turn on this thing; was following early, then was in-n-out quite a bit that fall.

Anyway, what bothered me was two-fold: first, given the date range of the PR(s?) and the announced, let's say, "effective date," I could not see how the paperwork could get to NASDAQ abd cleared in time to make the date; second, if there *was* an end-run around it being a divvy/split, I could not find any regs to support it. On the contrary, what I found was something to the effect that "less than full disclosure on any cash or stock distribution" is considered manipulative.

That's good to know about the share structure, though. Do you know whether the share structure you consider "genuine" can be verified? Or is that one of those "he said, she said" controversies? In other words, do the various camps agree that A/S would have needed to be increased in order to accommodate the 6-for-1?

Tex, I'm going by the last filing that gave the A/S and when you compare the O/S at the time of the announcement, there wouldn't be enough shares to accomodate the 6:1. Now to throw a monkey wrench in the game, Rufus said the O/S was bought up at the time of the merger. So how can millions of shares have been traded since the merger. Makes you go hmmmm

man, I have no idea...

are you saying Harris believed there was a problem with the share structure but he went ahead and announced the 6-for-1?

No, I'm not saying that at all. Just recently someone brought that problem up. And I'm saying that Rufus said recently that was going to be addressed in his next filing. But we were shut down and no filing was made concerning that.
 
Posted by Igor R on :
 
Ironman, what kind of time line do you see happening for possible future events to play out? Thats if by some miracle something actually happens.
 
Posted by T e x on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by harpeter:
quote:
Originally posted by T e x:
quote:
Originally posted by harpeter:
Hello, Harpeter,

Nice to see another new "face"...

If I knew that about share-count, I had forgotten it. I haven't followed every twist-n-turn on this thing; was following early, then was in-n-out quite a bit that fall.

Anyway, what bothered me was two-fold: first, given the date range of the PR(s?) and the announced, let's say, "effective date," I could not see how the paperwork could get to NASDAQ abd cleared in time to make the date; second, if there *was* an end-run around it being a divvy/split, I could not find any regs to support it. On the contrary, what I found was something to the effect that "less than full disclosure on any cash or stock distribution" is considered manipulative.

That's good to know about the share structure, though. Do you know whether the share structure you consider "genuine" can be verified? Or is that one of those "he said, she said" controversies? In other words, do the various camps agree that A/S would have needed to be increased in order to accommodate the 6-for-1?

Tex, I'm going by the last filing that gave the A/S and when you compare the O/S at the time of the announcement, there wouldn't be enough shares to accomodate the 6:1. Now to throw a monkey wrench in the game, Rufus said the O/S was bought up at the time of the merger. So how can millions of shares have been traded since the merger. Makes you go hmmmm

man, I have no idea...

are you saying Harris believed there was a problem with the share structure but he went ahead and announced the 6-for-1?

No, I'm not saying that at all. Just recently someone brought that problem up. And I'm saying that Rufus said recently that was going to be addressed in his next filing. But we were shut down and no filing was made concerning that.
OK, well, these are new ideas--at least to me.

So, given that I got it wrong, help me understand what you *are* saying...
 
Posted by Ironman64 on :
 
Well, been away watching the Spurs disappoint. Led most of the game until near the end. Hopefully the Celtics can make it through Detroit and then take out the Lakers in the finals.

As for you Tex, I think even those here that have been blinded in the past by your views could see through you today. And as Paul would say, hope you aren't standing too close to the blast zone. Your views on the TPR are comical at best, even you will be brought to your knees when this reaches its conclusion.

Don't be a hater, I have no ill will towards you. Besides, those like you will be kissing Paul's rear end in due time. Perhaps we can share a drink at the CSHD party at the finish line. Heck, I even promise not to rub your nose in it too hard over your tainted views.

Good night all, catch ya tomorrow.
 
Posted by harpeter on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by T e x:
quote:
Originally posted by harpeter:
quote:
Originally posted by T e x:
quote:
Originally posted by harpeter:
Hello, Harpeter,

Nice to see another new "face"...

If I knew that about share-count, I had forgotten it. I haven't followed every twist-n-turn on this thing; was following early, then was in-n-out quite a bit that fall.

Anyway, what bothered me was two-fold: first, given the date range of the PR(s?) and the announced, let's say, "effective date," I could not see how the paperwork could get to NASDAQ abd cleared in time to make the date; second, if there *was* an end-run around it being a divvy/split, I could not find any regs to support it. On the contrary, what I found was something to the effect that "less than full disclosure on any cash or stock distribution" is considered manipulative.

That's good to know about the share structure, though. Do you know whether the share structure you consider "genuine" can be verified? Or is that one of those "he said, she said" controversies? In other words, do the various camps agree that A/S would have needed to be increased in order to accommodate the 6-for-1?

Tex, I'm going by the last filing that gave the A/S and when you compare the O/S at the time of the announcement, there wouldn't be enough shares to accomodate the 6:1. Now to throw a monkey wrench in the game, Rufus said the O/S was bought up at the time of the merger. So how can millions of shares have been traded since the merger. Makes you go hmmmm

man, I have no idea...

are you saying Harris believed there was a problem with the share structure but he went ahead and announced the 6-for-1?

No, I'm not saying that at all. Just recently someone brought that problem up. And I'm saying that Rufus said recently that was going to be addressed in his next filing. But we were shut down and no filing was made concerning that.
OK, well, these are new ideas--at least to me.

So, given that I got it wrong, help me understand what you *are* saying...

Tex, I didn't say you got it wrong. All I'm saying is I don't know if it was an oversight on Rufus's part or not that the A/S would probably would have had to be raised before a 6:1 could have been initiated. That's all I'm saying.
 
Posted by T e x on :
 
IM posts (superfluous deleted):

quote:
As for you Tex, I think even those here that have been blinded in the past by your views could see through you today. And as Paul would say, hope you aren't standing too close to the blast zone. Your views on the TPR are comical at best, even you will be brought to your knees when this reaches its conclusion.

Don't be a hater, I have no ill will towards you. Besides, those like you will be kissing Paul's rear end in due time. Perhaps we can share a drink at the CSHD party at the finish line. Heck, I even promise not to rub your nose in it too hard over your tainted views.

Gunny Gracious!

such inflated language...

"blast zone" "brought to knees" etc etc...

lol, what *are* you Ritalin' on about?

YOU yourself ID'd the TPR as the blasting cap--what's so comical about looking for the actual regulations?
 
Posted by T e x on :
 
[to cut down on long reposts, harpenter replies to me:]

quote:
Tex, I didn't say you got it wrong. All I'm saying is I don't know if it was an oversight on Rufus's part or not that the A/S would probably would have had to be raised before a 6:1 could have been initiated. That's all I'm saying.
Roger, that... and all I'm saying is I'm not familiar with that issue. I agree it could be a problem, whether oversight or not...but I just don't know enough about that to comment.

Prolly some others here remember those questions, though... maybe Wally? maybe Catia? maybe Glassy-Eyed-Bozo?
 
Posted by Ocqueoc on :
 
Cshd is the only stock I have ever bought.

I have learned a LOT, sense this all started, and one thing I did learn, is , if "someone" needs to start posting on a thread , that had only reached 16 pages in 6 months, they have an agenda.

One good thing to come out of the last few pages, I see a lot of people that I have missed chatting with [Smile]

Good night to all and to all a good night!!
 
Posted by PCola77 on :
 
Ironman, you're more than slightly delusional if you think any of your babble has gotten anyone to "see through" Tex. You're barking up the wrong tree here man. Tex is one of the good guys here. Despite the fact that I often wear out my Tex to English dictionary trying to understand what he's saying, he's always trying to clear things up, not muddy the waters.

You may not agree with his methods, and you may think you aren't muddying the waters, but years of posting here has afforded me to opportunity to see who is here to help others, and who is here to help themselves. Tex is certainly one of the former, and my gut tells me that you are one of the latter, but maybe you'll prove me wrong.

As for his views on the TPR, I'm curious what is comical? Maybe I'm just dumb, but I didn't think he really had any view on it other than trying to find out how one would retroactively put something like that through. I'm not exactly sure why you keep dancing away from that question by saying "Find the Reg that disallows it". If it was a common occurance, like if he was saying "Reverse splits are illegal" it would be easy to give counter examples, but in this case I do think the burden of proof is on you, since you are the one who brought it up in this contex, and still no one has ever demonstrated how this would work, and no one has found any precedent for it.

On the bright side, I am finding all of this rather entertaining, but I am still curious why you would bother coming here to post on a thread that was basically dead, aside from the occassional "Anything new here?" posts. And what good you expected to do by saying "I know stuff, and things will be okay, but I can't tell you when it will happen, or really anything more than that." I just can't see any reason for your posting here. Mayeb if you had waited until everythign was almost done, and said "Something will happen within the week/month, etc" it would be one thing, but getting people riled up for basically no reason seems juvenile to me.
 
Posted by glassman on :
 
maybe Glassy-Eyed-Bozo?

who me?

 -

i know nothing
 
Posted by T e x on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by glassman:
maybe Glassy-Eyed-Bozo?

who me?

 -

i know nothing

no prob...just thought you might remember that share-structure question: I know I don't...
 
Posted by wallymac on :
 
I was about to post regarding the A/S but why. Nothing has changed except for Ironman64 coming over here to stir things up.

IMO, he's probably been banned from posting on other sites so he created a new alias and came here. Nothing he states, can he back up in any way shape or form, other than to say trust him or mark this post.

I'm not willing to play his little game anymore. I think all that ever bought this stock have been played with enough by Rufus and others in his camp. Though Rufus isn't the only one responsible for the current state of affairs, it happened on his watch so he does bear the brunt of responsibility.

What is true or false may never be known. If at some point light is shed on the whole situation then discussion is warranted. At this point hearing the same old we're golden but don't know when it will happen is as useful as ice cubes in an igloo.

The TPR that Rufus wanted to use if I remember correctly was from the bond market and can also be found in P.I.P.E's. The A/S according to the last 10K filed was stated at 100M shares. with Approx 48M outstanding. for a 6 to 1 reset to occur it would have had to be raised. Funny thing is that in an 8K naming Mike Alexander CEO after the SEC action, the O/S was reported at 151M yet no filing anywhere that raised the A/S.

Enough. I posted more than I intended. So I will bid you all a goodnight and say it is nice to see a few familiar posters that I haven't seen for a while.

Good Luck in all your trading and remember to always protect your capital.
 
Posted by Ocqueoc on :
 
Hi Wally!!

Glassman, how is your beautiful glass work coming along?
 
Posted by frank021474 on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by harpeter:
Hello, Harpeter,

Nice to see another new "face"...

If I knew that about share-count, I had forgotten it. I haven't followed every twist-n-turn on this thing; was following early, then was in-n-out quite a bit that fall.

Anyway, what bothered me was two-fold: first, given the date range of the PR(s?) and the announced, let's say, "effective date," I could not see how the paperwork could get to NASDAQ abd cleared in time to make the date; second, if there *was* an end-run around it being a divvy/split, I could not find any regs to support it. On the contrary, what I found was something to the effect that "less than full disclosure on any cash or stock distribution" is considered manipulative.

That's good to know about the share structure, though. Do you know whether the share structure you consider "genuine" can be verified? Or is that one of those "he said, she said" controversies? In other words, do the various camps agree that A/S would have needed to be increased in order to accommodate the 6-for-1?

Tex, I'm going by the last filing that gave the A/S and when you compare the O/S at the time of the announcement, there wouldn't be enough shares to accomodate the 6:1. Now to throw a monkey wrench in the game, Rufus said the O/S was bought up at the time of the merger. So how can millions of shares have been traded since the merger. Makes you go hmmmm

Good Morning!

Arguing about 6:1 etc..... who cares?

Right now the stock is worth jack. Debating on the share structure and 6:1 is at best pointless.

Once the company (tongue in cheek) becomes operational and assets are accounted for AND the shares are worth more than a stick of gum THEN lets get back to that 6:1 discussion. (Not that I think its even logistically/legally possible given the 2yr waste)

The funniest is that some say its going to be great when this all comes to light...followed by "don't ask me where I get my info". Its like guaranteeing life after death. No matter WHAT you are golden because nobody can refute your claims [BadOne]

nevertheless hope everyone is doing well [Cool]

How about that "CSHD" bond that matured?? (The bond topic is always good for at least 5 pages of Ironman banter lol)
 
Posted by Ironman64 on :
 
Good morning everyone.

Appreciate the kind PM's that a number of you have sent me the last few days.
 
Posted by Ironman64 on :
 
TimW --

I take it you were speaking of Paul Poetter in your earlier post, since he is located in AZ. A number of shareholders have been "involved" with him prior to the 4309 saga, but he has kind of fallen through the cracks as of late. Did you by chance visit him in Mesa?
 
Posted by harpeter on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by Ironman64:
TimW --

I take it you were speaking of Paul Poetter in your earlier post, since he is located in AZ. A number of shareholders have been "involved" with him prior to the 4309 saga, but he has kind of fallen through the cracks as of late. Did you by chance visit him in Mesa?

Ironman, could you explain what you meant by "involved" with Paul Poetter before the 4309 saga.

Also, have you ever been a Waatle(sp) shareholder?
 
Posted by Ironman64 on :
 
Harpeter --

In regards to Poetter, it is a complex situation. First off, Harris did outright say that Poetter was a wonderful friend and was trustworthy. He introduced Poetter at the Dallas dinner as a true friend or something to that effect. Many shareholders latched on to Poetter because they felt, rightfully so, that Poetter was a good man and Harris and Poetter had each others back. The problem arose when Poetter allegedly began a solicitation of shares (founders shares as he called them) through people like Dr. Jack (SNP) and Stockprophet. These alleged front men for Poetter on many occasions PM'd and emailed individuals, saying one could buy shares for around 5 cents a share, but that it had to be kept secret from Harris. BAM!!, warning lights should have gone off, but most never heeded the caution lights and bought anyway and followed the instruction to hide it from Harris. Those people, imo, were "involved" with Poetter.

As for your second question, I have never had an affiliation with Waatle, although I know several of them and they are great people.
 
Posted by Ironman64 on :
 
For those that think CSHD is toast or are losing hope, think on these questions:

* Why hasn't the 5-star General that was on an early PR with the UN Ambassador, a director, raise a stink if Harris/CSHD is a scam?
* Why hasn't the UN filed just one charge or refute anything?
* Why hasn't the VENZ government thrown a fit over the bonds?
* Why didn't TD Ameritrade, after being openly accused of NSS and other unsavory behavior, file anything like a C&D or even deny the claim?
* Why have several shareholders with connections met with brick walls any inquiry they have made with colleagues regarding CSHD?

Lots more questions, very few answers. Ever wonder why?
 
Posted by glassman on :
 
Ever wonder why?

sure, over a year ago. but then i moved on.
 
Posted by Ironman64 on :
 
No you didn't....if so, you wouldn't be here. Blunt, but true.
 
Posted by glassman on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by Ironman64:
No you didn't....if so, you wouldn't be here. Blunt, but true.

look man, we all have the questions, it's answers we want. seriously, you aren't bringing up any new questions here, i actually read SEC filings, when there's news? there'll be something to talk about, until then? it's just paint drying...
 
Posted by Peaser on :
 
 -

Glass, those *******s laced it...
 
Posted by glassman on :
 
yeah, and hopefully someday the SEC will publish a full accounting like they have with BCIT and MAMG...

(BCIT may have some more pages to publish but at least we have some facts and figures)

that koolaid jug is pretty big, but the one at Bear Stearns was alot bigger [Wink]
 
Posted by T e x on :
 
dude?

gotta hand it to ya--when you chill a thread? sumbuck gets f-r-i-g-i-d.

[Cool]
 
Posted by glassman on :
 
well, you know what Kesey used to say, "You're either on the bus or you're off the bus"....
 
Posted by T e x on :
 
best thing Kesey said imo (when asked about jail-time, which fits many situations):

"Walk slow, and drink lots of water."
 
Posted by bbbmine on :
 
Catia -- you have a PM [Smile]
 
Posted by TimW on :
 
I don't know, time will tell ironman. Sometime soon, i don't know when, i'll post that information.
 
Posted by T e x on :
 
lol, tim
 
Posted by T e x on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by bbbmine:
Catia -- you have a PM [Smile]

alas, "Mr. Cat's" box is full...perhaps you are the villain who will be catapulted to your KNEEZZZ when this BLAST ZONE detonates the dis-believers and haterzzzz into the WONDER-ZONE of "how did I get here?" Or, perhaps...you doubt the marvel of this post! Mark some words!

...somewhere...a broom is drearily sweeping--somewhere? a King has no Wife
 
Posted by glassman on :
 
...somewhere...a broom is drearily sweeping--somewhere? a King has no Wife

“I believe in a long, prolonged, derangement of the senses in order to obtain the unknown.”

Jim Morrison [BadOne]
 
Posted by T e x on :
 
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0utGfzzGqRQ&feature=related
 
Posted by bbbmine on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by T e x:
quote:
Originally posted by bbbmine:
Catia -- you have a PM [Smile]

alas, "Mr. Cat's" box is full...perhaps you are the villain who will be catapulted to your KNEEZZZ when this BLAST ZONE detonates the dis-believers and haterzzzz into the WONDER-ZONE of "how did I get here?" Or, perhaps...you doubt the marvel of this post! Mark some words!

...somewhere...a broom is drearily sweeping--somewhere? a King has no Wife

Whatever...
 
Posted by T e x on :
 
ohhh... loosen up-- It's Saturday night.
 
Posted by T e x on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by glassman:
...somewhere...a broom is drearily sweeping--somewhere? a King has no Wife

“I believe in a long, prolonged, derangement of the senses in order to obtain the unknown.”

Jim Morrison [BadOne]

ya?

OK...I call, and raise you a cover-band, doing Stairway to Heaven

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Gq9xU3rPltE
 
Posted by T e x on :
 
anyway, enough for this thread: diverting to JR's listening thread:

http://www.allstocks.com/stockmessageboard/ubb/ultimatebb.php/ubb/get_topic/f/14 /t/002826/p/7.html#000249
 
Posted by Mr. CATIAEngineer on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by T e x:
quote:
Originally posted by bbbmine:
Catia -- you have a PM [Smile]

alas, "Mr. Cat's" box is full...perhaps you are the villain who will be catapulted to your KNEEZZZ when this BLAST ZONE detonates the dis-believers and haterzzzz into the WONDER-ZONE of "how did I get here?" Or, perhaps...you doubt the marvel of this post! Mark some words!

...somewhere...a broom is drearily sweeping--somewhere? a King has no Wife

So....poetic [Razz]
 
Posted by T e x on :
 
well, I guess I shouldn't kid around with newcomers... [Roll Eyes]
 
Posted by 66inxs on :
 
...somewhere...a broom is drearily sweeping--somewhere? a King has no Wife

somewhere.... Rufus or Paul or whatever he calls himself this week is sitting in front of a cold drink trying to dream up another scam that will get him back on top again.

others.... are only a pawn in his game.
 
Posted by T e x on :
 
where you been?
 
Posted by 66inxs on :
 
Hi Tex good to hear from you again. just been busy TCB. hope things have been going well for you too
 
Posted by T e x on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by 66inxs:
Hi Tex good to hear from you again. just been busy TCB. hope things have been going well for you too

lol, man...check in more often...

good to see you out, doing well [Smile]
 
Posted by T e x on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by Ironman64:
Anyone recognize the name [BLEEP: edit]? If so, anyone have an idea if this person is friend or foe?

o my...

friend or foe...of what?

[ June 02, 2008, 10:16: Message edited by: T e x ]
 
Posted by Ironman64 on :
 
no "or what?"....friend or foe....he is one or the other.
 
Posted by wallymac on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by Ironman64:
no "or what?"....friend or foe....he is one or the other.

Who cares? This is a stock and a stock message board not a dating service.

When there is something of substance to talk about, able to be verified instead of puzzles and "Friend or Foe" BS, let us know.
 
Posted by Ironman64 on :
 
The question is whether this message board is a "country club" or not. I am not asking anyone to like what I have to say. And judging by the list of PM's I have gotten here, a certain group of posters have suffered the beat down when certain topics are introduced. Why is that?
 
Posted by T e x on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by Ironman64:
no "or what?"....friend or foe....he is one or the other.

sure there is...

friend of "logic," for example

foe of "balanced discussion," maybe

friend of "Alexander," perhaps

foe of "SEC," for instance...

see? lottsssssa possibilities
 
Posted by Ironman64 on :
 
nice skirt tex. and you know the "real" answer too.
 
Posted by T e x on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by Ironman64:
The question is whether this message board is a "country club" or not. I am not asking anyone to like what I have to say. And judging by the list of PM's I have gotten here, a certain group of posters have suffered the beat down when certain topics are introduced. Why is that?

lol, "country club"

I would say more like a think-tank than a country club, in that we help each other puzzle through stuff...

quote:
I am not asking anyone to like what I have to say.
lol, you ain't *said* much...a coupla posts, maybe... I remember that one in reply about Paul in Arizona. Other than those few, you've so far been all about the fantastic what-if this, what-if that?

Even the Glassy-Eyed-Bozo himself told you we KNOW the questions. Wally responded to you just now. Catia has responded...lol, several we haven't seen in quite a while have responded, including the wayward 10 of 13. Plus, new members joined up, apparently to join THIS discussion (I haven't noticed them posting elsewhere, yet--maybe they will, maybe they won't).

I think the point you're having difficulty with is this: "conjecture" has pretty much worn everybody smooth out... even those of us left who are willing to discuss it.

Basically, Allstocks has a higher-than-average ratio of members who value genuine discourse, as opposed to other message boards where you have to look far and wide to find such...where instead the norm is sheer banter, ad hominem argument, and so forth...
 
Posted by Ironman64 on :
 
Not what I am hearing, TEX.

And these are from highly respected people you and other have basically run off.
 
Posted by wallymac on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by Ironman64:
The question is whether this message board is a "country club" or not. I am not asking anyone to like what I have to say. And judging by the list of PM's I have gotten here, a certain group of posters have suffered the beat down when certain topics are introduced. Why is that?

No at this look at this properly. Those who think critically, like you asked and those that suspend disbelief.

We have critical thinkers not those that take the BS you spew and take it for fact.

Bring something tangent to the table. So far you haven't.
 
Posted by wallymac on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by Ironman64:
Not what I am hearing, TEX.

And these are from highly respected people you and other have basically run off.

Really name one or post a link.

Thought not. It's easy to state things that are unsupportable, much different to support them with links.

No one has ever been run off that supports what they believe with tangent facts. You really need to read all the past posts on this site.
 
Posted by Ironman64 on :
 
You haven't been paying attention then. [Wink]
 
Posted by wallymac on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by Ironman64:
You haven't been paying attention then. [Wink]

To what? Mark this post? I know from reliable source but won't divulge? An FBI guy winked at me?

Get real.
 
Posted by Ironman64 on :
 
Wally, I have said more than once I have a thick skin, much more than you can fathom. Nothing you, Tex or others can say will put a dent in me.

As for naming members....and you are a critical thinker? Tunnel vision is a more accurate view for what I have read by some here.
 
Posted by T e x on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by Ironman64:
You haven't been paying attention then. [Wink]

Actually, Wally is quite astute, which you would realize had you bothered to check his history.

btw, I get PMs, too [Wink]
 
Posted by glassman on :
 
hmmmmm....
this might get instersting...

 -
 
Posted by Ironman64 on :
 
Muhahah.....Tex.

You have told me more than once that you didn't wish to respond to me. What changed? Don't get me wrong, I am pleased you changed your mind. I will go on record that you are mixed up in this mess in a way that would surprise those that mark you as honest and forthright. You just don't want to say much bad about the Texas 100 crowd that is so deep in crap right now. Why is that? You can keep it simple or muddy the water with some goofy response that insults the intelligence of those that still hold you in awe (look over there, bright shiny thing....etc...).
 
Posted by wallymac on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by Ironman64:
Wally, I have said more than once I have a thick skin, much more than you can fathom. Nothing you, Tex or others can say will put a dent in me.

As for naming members....and you are a critical thinker? Tunnel vision is a more accurate view for what I have read by some here.

Without verification, You are a joke no matter how thick your skin is. No one is trying to penetrate your skin only get direct answers which you fail to give.

Play all the games you want, if they don't paly here because enough of us have had enough of the promises and games then it's on you and your Dali Lama, Rufus.

Oh, by the way, I'm a shareholder and nothing I say or my disbelief will change that nor affect any miracle that happens in the future. If you think it will, you really need to read the Reg's more throughly and comprehend them.
 
Posted by Ironman64 on :
 
Why do you single out Rufus, Wally? Aren't there others that are much more likely to be the crooks? Be careful....Mr. Astute.
 
Posted by wallymac on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by Ironman64:
Muhahah.....Tex.

You have told me more than once that you didn't wish to respond to me. What changed? Don't get me wrong, I am pleased you changed your mind. I will go on record that you are mixed up in this mess in a way that would surprise those that mark you as honest and forthright. You just don't want to say much bad about the Texas 100 crowd that is so deep in crap right now. Why is that? You can keep it simple or muddy the water with some goofy response that insults the intelligence of those that still hold you in awe (look over there, bright shiny thing....etc...).

You are using the exact same misconception that Rufus did many times. Taking heresay as fact instead of doing any DD.

Tex has never done anything other than present questions to stockholders that proved to be right. Of course if you have HARD PROOF that selling at the highs was the wrong thing to do, have at it.

All I have seen from you is innuendo and subterfuge. Please correct me if I'm wrong. Since you don't answer the hard questions and use smoke and mirrors to answer the softballs.
 
Posted by wallymac on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by Ironman64:
Why do you single out Rufus, Wally? Aren't there others that are much more likely to be the crooks? Be careful....Mr. Astute.

Read my posts, all of them since FHAL into and past the merger. If you can't do that, then I understand your tunnel vision.
 
Posted by wallymac on :
 
Heck just read my posts a few pages back and you will have our answer.

Too tough, Yep of course.

I understand that you would rather spew your opinion than deal with facts as you have done since your first post. Nowhereville, USA is certainly appropriate.

Heck let me make it easy for you.

Was Rufus the CEO of the company, prior to and after they became halted by the SEC? DId Rufus know of the relationship with AJW prior to taking over the shell?

Why has Rufus never hired an attorney to protect the company?

Please answer those questions directly.
 
Posted by Ironman64 on :
 
Sorry, I am not reading 2744 posts to see what you have posted. I am only interested in what you are saying in the here and now....and the fact you won't answer my softballs.
 
Posted by Ironman64 on :
 
Funny that you call my Nowhereville, USA appropriate since I am basically in your backyard at this moment. [Wink]
 
Posted by wallymac on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by Ironman64:
Funny that you call my Nowhereville, USA appropriate since I am basically in your backyard at this moment. [Wink]

Just checked my backyard and I didn't have to run you off.

Just read this thread and you will see why I hold, not blame, Rufus responsible.
 
Posted by T e x on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by Ironman64:
Muhahah.....Tex.

You have told me more than once that you didn't wish to respond to me. What changed? Don't get me wrong, I am pleased you changed your mind. I will go on record that you are mixed up in this mess in a way that would surprise those that mark you as honest and forthright. You just don't want to say much bad about the Texas 100 crowd that is so deep in crap right now. Why is that? You can keep it simple or muddy the water with some goofy response that insults the intelligence of those that still hold you in awe (look over there, bright shiny thing....etc...).

Basically, I asked you to bring your A-game...

Then? I realized this *is* your A-game! [BadOne]

I don't even know what "Texas 100" refers to; I assume Alexander, et al.

lol, you go "on record" all you want. The facts are I didn't even get to trade this the way I wanted--and, hey, I called the gap to be filled...it's all on-board, right here...

Anyway, my "involvement" has strictly been as interested observer on various threads, including here, obviously--and as mod here.

In fact, I wanted to go to that meeting at the Mexican joint near here...Addison, Richardson, Plano...wherever. I just couldn't get away...

But, boy, howdy! Later, I was GLAD I didn't go...
 
Posted by Ironman64 on :
 
I don't think you will feel that way when this is over. Have you ever spoken to him?
 
Posted by Ironman64 on :
 
We'll see Tex.

I think one thing we can all agree on here is that those crooks that tried to enrich themselves at our expenses should pay dearly. Fair statement?

And those that are proven guilty, the book will be thrown at them. Could be happening as we speak, but it will happen.
 
Posted by wallymac on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by Ironman64:
I don't think you will feel that way when this is over. Have you ever spoken to him?

Do you really want to get down? OK. here goes.

First, CSHD is trading on the Greysheets, Why?

OK, you will state as Rufus has that he wanted the trading halted.

So why didn't he do the things that would have accomplished that.

Like What? Easy, File the proper filing to take the company Private. You don't have to pay to do it, other companies have done it. Then there is no more trading in a public stock. Nah to easy.

Why did he promise a Proxy that would give all invested an exit point according to his exit strategy? Because he couldn't. Not by a designed plan. And the answer that he did it to throw off the bad guys doesn't hold water since he didn't let the LOYAL holders know it was only a FAKE.


Let's just start with these since it seems difficult for you to answer even one direct question that doesn't entail supposition and suspension of disbelief. It's OK if you have to go back to him and can't answer immediately. I will understand.
 
Posted by T e x on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by Ironman64:
We'll see Tex.

I think one thing we can all agree on here is that those crooks that tried to enrich themselves at our expenses should pay dearly. Fair statement?

And those that are proven guilty, the book will be thrown at them. Could be happening as we speak, but it will happen.

I dunno...

Scammy-boyz get away with lots of junky junk in pennyland--well, even at ENRON--but particularly in pennyland. But, ya, I'd like to see 'em all rounded up: however it went down, so far they haven't merely *tried,* they're getting away with it. So far? looks like a "perfect crime," to me...with maybe some wristslaps here and there, some bars on being an officer in a public company, maybe...

but, sure, in a fair world, all involved should pay the price for ripping off folks.
 
Posted by wallymac on :
 
You know, Ironman, If you had bothered to read what Tex posts here and at the Hub, you would know that he doesn't cotton to people or companies that take advantage of the common(retail) customer and is a proponent of the common man.

But I guess it's always easier to attack and attempt to discredit good people than to actually look at what they stand for on public forums. Just as you attack me without bothering to read where I have stood and why I have changed my opinion.
 
Posted by Ironman64 on :
 
Most all that was stated after the SEC action by RPH on threads was not pointed at shareholders but the crooks. Hard as it might be to believe, it is true. Wally, you might be the sharpest tool in the shed here, but if you try to make this fit inside the box, your head will explode. If you and others just can't fathom it, we will just have to agree to disagree until judgment day on this stock. And it will come and you will be amazed.
 
Posted by Ironman64 on :
 
I stand by my assessment of some here. I've been prepped.
 
Posted by wallymac on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by Ironman64:
Most all that was stated after the SEC action by RPH on threads was not pointed at shareholders but the crooks. Hard as it might be to believe, it is true. Wally, you might be the sharpest tool in the shed here, but if you try to make this fit inside the box, your head will explode. If you and others just can't fathom it, we will just have to agree to disagree until judgment day on this stock. And it will come and you will be amazed.

Right, Trust me, the checks in the mail. I mislead investor's on purpose.

Give me a break.

You just stated that Rufus mislead investors because he was trying to mislead the "Bad Guys". And we know this is real because he mislead us?

[BadOne] [Were Up] [Were Down] [Wall Bang]
 
Posted by wallymac on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by Ironman64:
I stand by my assessment of some here. I've been prepped.

Well then you were prepped by the wrong people. I have followed this story on many boards including RPH's until banned for asking what happened to the proxy. My Alias is the same on every site no need to change who I am.

This site has been the most civil and logical since the beginning. Maybe RPH and your handlers only recently became aware of it but, that's where true DD comes into view. If it takes reading 5,000 posts then so be it. That's what we do here, take the extra step.

Man, you were so way off in trying to discredit Mr. Cat here, I knew you were bogus. Mr. Cat has done a ton of DD, and as far as I remember has been a very big proponent of RPH after the SEC action.

DD, doesn't mean talking to a few people it means researching things on your own.
 
Posted by glassman on :
 
This site has been the most civil and logical since the beginning.

LOL.. that ain't saying much [Big Grin]

this stock prolly was the focal point of the most trouble of any stock ever posted here,
BUT? not the cause. the cause is always individuals making poor decisions in how they communicate.

this stock has been the looniest one i ever saw...

at least the the others had clear cases of dilution...
 
Posted by wallymac on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by glassman:
This site has been the most civil and logical since the beginning.

LOL.. that ain't saying much [Big Grin]

this stock prolly was the focal point of the most trouble of any stock ever posted here,
BUT? not the cause. the cause is always individuals making poor decisions in how they communicate.

this stock has been the looniest one i ever saw...

at least the the others had clear cases of dilution...

I agree, this stock took a different road but the question of dilution is still up in the air. According to the filings and some side deals the O/S is much higher than the A/S.
 
Posted by Ironman64 on :
 
As stated before Wally, I am not discussing the Mr. Cat situation at this point. [Wink]
 
Posted by glassman on :
 
i stopped readin' the filings last year...

it doesn't surprise me that none of the numbers add up...

they were prolly keeping the accounting on Applebees nakpins [Big Grin]

at least the CPA got his hand smacked for signing off on the Venezuakan bond listed int SEC filing... that was what really "got me" an SEC filing filed and signed that showed fraudulent assets.. shheeeeeshhh..

when Rufufu refused to get an attorney? he basically shafted all the shareholders..

i still think the SEC "owes" it to the shareholders to follow thru on the case rather than just allow him to default on it...
 
Posted by Ironman64 on :
 
Regarding Allstocks, no doubt about it, it is a level or two higher than IHUB and HSM.

And, to this point, I haven't been told that Allstocks would be shut down before this over, as the other two will.
 
Posted by wallymac on :
 
Why did you before, when you thought, according to your sources it would play to your benefit? Just tells me that your sources are not reliable.

Forget about the minutia and deal with what is germane. How about giving ANY INFORMATION that is in the least verifiable?
 
Posted by glassman on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by Ironman64:
Regarding Allstocks, no doubt about it, it is a level or two higher than IHUB and HSM.

And, to this point, I haven't been told that Allstocks would be shut down before this over, as the other two will.

i should hope not.

freedom of speech is encouraged here. as is politeness.

agree to disagree like adults.
 
Posted by T e x on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by Ironman64:
I stand by my assessment of some here. I've been prepped.

lolololol...

How can you "stand by your assessment," given you've "been prepped" ???

By definition, that conveys not having an independent assessment, but rather an agenda...
 
Posted by wallymac on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by Ironman64:
Regarding Allstocks, no doubt about it, it is a level or two higher than IHUB and HSM.

And, to this point, I haven't been told that Allstocks would be shut down before this over, as the other two will.

A hundred levels over the farce, of how many different sites that have housed RPH. His and his Mod's deletion finger's were far heavier than any site I have ever visited.

I wonder Why? Oh that's right the Bad Guys would disrupt the site. Please. I'm a share holder and got deleted for asking pertinent questions and many others were deleted as well.

Dissension was not acceptable. at least here and other non RPH sites allow discourse.
 
Posted by T e x on :
 
quote:
Regarding Allstocks, no doubt about it, it is a level or two higher than IHUB and HSM.

...and why do you think that is? Do you, for instance, think it's solely by accident?
 
Posted by Ironman64 on :
 
That's what you want, don't you Tex.

Nope, just have my sights on the crooks. And falsely blaming Harris for what others have done will not go without challenge anymore here.

The posters you have beat down in the past were much nicer than me.

Gonna turn in for the night, busy week ahead.

P.S. Tex - Saying Allstocks is a notch or two higher than IHUB and HSM is no compliment, bud.
 
Posted by wallymac on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by Ironman64:
That's what you want, don't you Tex.

Nope, just have my sights on the crooks. And falsely blaming Harris for what others have done will not go without challenge anymore here.

The posters you have beat down in the past were much nicer than me.

Gonna turn in for the night, busy week ahead.

Turn in for a lifetime, because you have added nothing of substance.

Not only do you know nothing of the previous history of this thread but of Allstocks as a whole.

Once again your infallible DD has failed you.

It's too bad that your handlers sent a boy to do a man's job, but then again, in this case, any they send would be lambs to the slaughter since none have anything to back up the claims you make.
 
Posted by glassman on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by Ironman64:
That's what you want, don't you Tex.

Nope, just have my sights on the crooks. And falsely blaming Harris for what others have done will not go without challenge anymore here.

The posters you have beat down in the past were much nicer than me.

Gonna turn in for the night, busy week ahead.

P.S. Tex - Saying Allstocks is a notch or two higher than IHUB and HSM is no compliment, bud.

'fore you go nightyniten' answer me this one little question.

Why on earth would the CEO of a company with shareholders that paid good money to buy into that company show up to court without legal representation?

Not only is leqal representation required by regulations? The company is OWNED by the shareholders who basically DID NOT get represented yet... (notice i too said yet, but that may not be good for Rufufu when it happens)
 
Posted by Igor R on :
 
What about blaming Harris for not doing anything to either stop or prevent those crooks? Since mid to late 2006 he hasn't done jack squat but twiddle his thumbs. And in a couple of months it will have been 2 years. In those 2 years Harris and his mighty "connections" have accomplished nothing, while many innocent shareholders lost everything.
 
Posted by wallymac on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by Ironman64:
That's what you want, don't you Tex.

Nope, just have my sights on the crooks. And falsely blaming Harris for what others have done will not go without challenge anymore here.

The posters you have beat down in the past were much nicer than me.

Gonna turn in for the night, busy week ahead.

P.S. Tex - Saying Allstocks is a notch or two higher than IHUB and HSM is no compliment, bud.

Was Rufus the CEO of CSHD when everything went down?

Was Rufus aware of the situation with AJW prior to the merger?

Did Rufus decide to take on the toxic financing prior to completing the merger?

Did Rufus tells the investors, his mission was to spotlight toxic financing or did he tell them he had a company bringing in over a billion dollars in assets?

What's the status of the bonds RPH said the company controlled?

What's the Status of the JV's that the company Pr'd and placed so much emphasis on?

Does the company have any money in the bank?

Does the company have an address, other than a P.O. Box?

Heck, this is just a few questions, come on answer.

If not, go back underneath the rock you climbing out from under and get one of your handlers to come on over and answer the only questions that really matter.
 
Posted by glassman on :
 
darn wally, i just wanted one, you gave him so much to work on that he's not gonna bother now... [Big Grin]
 
Posted by wallymac on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by glassman:
darn wally, i just wanted one, you gave him so much to work on that he's not gonna bother now... [Big Grin]

Don't worry he wasn't going to answer any of them anyway.

Just look at how many of my previous questions were answered.
 
Posted by T e x on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by Ironman64:
That's what you want, don't you Tex.

Nope, just have my sights on the crooks. And falsely blaming Harris for what others have done will not go without challenge anymore here.

The posters you have beat down in the past were much nicer than me.

Gonna turn in for the night, busy week ahead.

P.S. Tex - Saying Allstocks is a notch or two higher than IHUB and HSM is no compliment, bud.

That's what you want, don't you Tex.

i have no clue what you're responding to...

Nope, just have my sights on the crooks.

GOOD! scit 'em, boy!

And falsely blaming Harris for what others have done will not go without challenge anymore here.

Hard row to hoe, that: be tough to "falsely blame" the CEO, given the CEO is cap' of da ship...

I suppose it's been the case, somewhere, sometime, that miscreants surrounding the CEO pulled off some kind of scam... But then, one must question said CEO's judgment, talent, organizational skills, etc...

Anyway, keep it adult-level discourse, and you are GOLDEN to challenge away.

The posters you have beat down in the past were much nicer than me.

Actually? not so much... those I for real whupped up on were running front-loaded, low-float PnDs...with entire crews of multi-nick posters. In other words, newbs could get sucked in and watch their dough get VAPORIZED in a matter of minutes. Basically, nothing to do with this thread...this thing was a great flipper.

You have phoned, e-mailed, PM'd many, many people, apparently...looking for the "inside scoop." Some, no doubt, believe as you do; that is, the "miracle" awaits... Others, apparently, are sick and tired of your behavior. I mean, to the point of being sick & tired of being sick & tired...

But all that aside...no, you're an odd-but-perversely endearing little *****cat compared to some of the genuine bad actors who have paraded through here.

Anyway...keep it somewhat civil...and fire away, lol
 
Posted by Mr. CATIAEngineer on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by Ironman64:
As stated before Wally, I am not discussing the Mr. Cat situation at this point. [Wink]

Why not? Did someone slap you on the hand for bringing up things you have no business discussing? Poor guy, your "friends" must scare you.

As for your [BLEEP: edit] question. He is, or at least was, a shareholder of CSHD. It appears that he purchased stock through 2 different brokers....and POSSIBLY through a corporation. He probably wouldnt appreciate you naming him on a public forum, especially the way in which you mentioned him. I assume he is not a poster here or he would have probably filed a complaint already for plastering his name up on the board like a target.

[ June 02, 2008, 10:14: Message edited by: T e x ]
 
Posted by Ironman64 on :
 
Mr. Cat, why don't you research that name a little more before you open mouth, insert foot next time.
 
Posted by Ironman64 on :
 
And, hardly, on getting my hand slapped.

It is a little deeper than that, that is for sure.
 
Posted by T e x on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by Ironman64:
Mr. Cat, why don't you research that name a little more before you open mouth, insert foot next time.

Is that person an officer of the company, or some other "public" figure?
 
Posted by PCola77 on :
 
Why not just say what you know abotu this guy, instead of asking what others know? You have some serious self-confidence issues don't you. "Hey everyone, look at me, I know something that you don't!" [Roll Eyes]
 
Posted by Ironman64 on :
 
PCola -- self confidence issues. Hahaha, far from it my friend. Let's just say he is/was very close to Mr. Alexander and Perley.
 
Posted by T e x on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by Ironman64:
PCola -- self confidence issues. Hahaha, far from it my friend. Let's just say he is/was very close to Mr. Alexander and Perley.

OK, but they're publicly known, involved, etc...

If this fellow is a private individual, not named in any charges, etc. ... I fail to see why we are naming him. Please explain, quickly...
 
Posted by Ironman64 on :
 
Oh, he also has some 'splaining to do. He has been tied to some misdeeds. One which can be posted publicly involves the notorious flash drive debacle. He was right there for it.
 
Posted by T e x on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by Ironman64:
Oh, he also has some 'splaining to do. He has been tied to some misdeeds. One which can be posted publicly involves the notorious flash drive debacle. He was right there for it.

explain...otherwise, I'm about to edit that name from posts until I get a clear ruling...
 
Posted by Ironman64 on :
 
Edit away, perhaps this discussion was better suited to PM's or something.
 
Posted by Ironman64 on :
 
Let me ask everyone here something and I will keep names out of this discussion. Do you realize that a number of shareholders have received various levels of telephone threats when they have poked around or inquired to key former FHAL managment members (or "key" figures) over the past couple of years?
 
Posted by glassman on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by Ironman64:
Oh, he also has some 'splaining to do. He has been tied to some misdeeds. One which can be posted publicly involves the notorious flash drive debacle. He was right there for it.

i might point out that freedom of speech, like the freedom to swing your fist, ends at the other guys nose....

post some facts and be prepared to back them up.

if you've been banned form other boards? it's probably because of posts like this.

your post has no meaning yet seems incriminating. on other words? IMO you are still FOS.
 
Posted by Ironman64 on :
 
Thanks glass. [Wink]
 
Posted by Ocqueoc on :
 
Good morning [Smile]

Have a great day!!
The sun is shining, the birds are singing!!

oops I see the "someone" with issues ,is still here.

AGENDA, AGENDA IMO
 
Posted by Ironman64 on :
 
Hi OC....what do you surmise might be my agenda?

Feel free anyone, would love to hear it.
 
Posted by JERSEYHAWG on :
 
GOOD MORNING TO ALL

I HAVE BEEN ENJOYING THE BANTER
 
Posted by glassman on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by Ironman64:
Thanks glass. [Wink]

thanks for what? you're wasting our time here.

the "thing" is? this "stuff" you claim will happen, will happen whether we get your "hints" or not. there's other business to take care of while we watch the paint dry .

as for posting some shareholders name and implying they have to "answer" to you? well thats BS. if you have a "statement" to make?

call the FBI and make it.

don't make yourself into some sort of cyber "avenger" out to right society's wrongs by gossiping about crap. get it.

you are personally responsible for the content of your posts. since your post doesn't say a damn thing other than the guys name and that he may need to answer to you? it's worthless and basically defamatory. the mods then have to decide whether it is actionable based that. it has no news value, the only purpose is to spread gossip we don't need gossip.
 
Posted by glassman on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by Ironman64:
Hi OC....what do you surmise might be my agenda?

Feel free anyone, would love to hear it.

your agenda is to martyr yourself for "the cause" which is lost at best and most likely imaginary...

you forgot to answer me why Rufufu "forgot" to get a lawyer to go to court.

he owed the shareholders that much. total failure. that's what that was, there's no answer to it, and it ended any possibility that shareholders would get justice.
 
Posted by retiredat49 on :
 
WOB...
 
Posted by Ocqueoc on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by Ironman64:
Hi OC....what do you surmise might be my agenda?

Feel free anyone, would love to hear it.

Well you tell us what your agenda is.
oh thats right, you don't answer questions!!

IMO, your agenda is to try and be another "tut"
Do you remember that name???

We do not want another game "player"
We do not want another "trouble maker"
We do not want another "person who thinks, they are in a know boat"

This is all IMO

I think hsm would love you, why don't you try playing over there, [Wink]
 
Posted by Mr. CATIAEngineer on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by Ironman64:
Mr. Cat, why don't you research that name a little more before you open mouth, insert foot next time.

Before I "open mouth"? [Roll Eyes]

IMO my post was much more informative than yours. I chose to point out that the person you named was a legal shareholder during the time when the NOBO was pulled and should not be targetted on a public board by you or anyone else. Your post simply appeared to be an attempt to attack and discredit someone that may or may not be able to defend themselves.

Whether or not YOU think this person is some sort of enemy is irrelevant. Bringing the name to this thread was dirty IMO.
 
Posted by Mr. CATIAEngineer on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by Ocqueoc:
quote:
Originally posted by Ironman64:
Hi OC....what do you surmise might be my agenda?

Feel free anyone, would love to hear it.

Well you tell us what your agenda is.
oh thats right, you don't answer questions!!

IMO, your agenda is to try and be another "tut"
Do you remember that name???

We do not want another game "player"
We do not want another "trouble maker"
We do not want another "person who thinks, they are in a know boat"

This is all IMO

I think hsm would love you, why don't you try playing over there, [Wink]

"I think hsm would love you, why don't you try playing over there,"

Been there, done that....IMO of course [Wink]
 
Posted by Ocqueoc on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by JERSEYHAWG:
GOOD MORNING TO ALL

I HAVE BEEN ENJOYING THE BANTER

Jersey;s in the house [Big Grin]

Good morning to you!!
 
Posted by Ironman64 on :
 
Sheez, Glass, why don't you tell everyone your theory on it. I am sure Rufus is a few hundred steps ahead of you on why he handled it the way he did. And the list of questions I posted a few days ago should put reasonable doubt to those that "truly" think this was an outright scam. However, some just can't believe that there is much more in play here. Others have ulterior motives.
 
Posted by new2stocks on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by Mr. CATIAEngineer:
quote:
Originally posted by Ocqueoc:
quote:
Originally posted by Ironman64:
Hi OC....what do you surmise might be my agenda?

Feel free anyone, would love to hear it.

Well you tell us what your agenda is.
oh thats right, you don't answer questions!!

IMO, your agenda is to try and be another "tut"
Do you remember that name???

We do not want another game "player"
We do not want another "trouble maker"
We do not want another "person who thinks, they are in a know boat"

This is all IMO

I think hsm would love you, why don't you try playing over there, [Wink]

"I think hsm would love you, why don't you try playing over there,"

Been there, done that....IMO of course [Wink]

I'm betting that being banned from HSM under a different alias is the reason why he can't or won't post there! IMO [Razz]
 
Posted by Ironman64 on :
 
Hahaha....do you really think that a pro-Rufus poster would be welcome on HSM? You know better than that.
 
Posted by T e x on :
 
quote:
I am sure Rufus is a few hundred steps ahead . . .
of a bench warrant.
 
Posted by glassman on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by Ironman64:
Sheez, Glass, why don't you tell everyone your theory on it. I am sure Rufus is a few hundred steps ahead of you on why he handled it the way he did. And the list of questions I posted a few days ago should put reasonable doubt to those that "truly" think this was an outright scam. However, some just can't believe that there is much more in play here. Others have ulterior motives.

look, you might be sure, but as far as i'm concerned? Rufufu is like that guy on burn notice but not nearly as clever. he had to show up with a lawyer because WE shareholders (notice i said we) have an interest too.
it really is that simple. i followed this thing closely for quite awhile, but after that? it was fairly obvious that he was not competent. as far as i'm concerned? he got gamed by everybody, including the short-sellers and the other company insiders.

like i said the other day? most people here really do want to know WTF happened and are truly interested in real facts.

got facts? share 'em.

otherwise? the speckelation got old a long time ago..
 
Posted by IrishLife2 on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by wallymac:
quote:
Originally posted by Ironman64:
You haven't been paying attention then. [Wink]

To what? Mark this post? I know from reliable source but won't divulge? An FBI guy winked at me?

Get real.

Wallymac...this is just RonBurgundy in a new movie roll...Iron Man! Consider the source! LOL
 
Posted by new2stocks on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by T e x:
quote:
I am sure Rufus is a few hundred steps ahead . . .
of a bench warrant.
 -
 
Posted by 10of13 on :
 
Ironman...are these "your questions" that you keep raving about, that should place enough doubt in shareholders minds?
Dude?
If you are some high ranking official or even an individual that simply doesn't want to be linked to a tripped out, over exaggerated UFO siting...you walk away...you do not acknowledge what a drunk or misinformed confused soul has conjured up...
it is that simply...
that is the answer to each of your questions listed below...there is no deep dark conspiracy going on...

and as for your post about being "prepped" in regards to the posters here at allstocks? that validates the "assumption" that you have an agenda...compounded by the fact that you continue to post here with no true information only more conjured up theories(the misinformed lost soul)...agenda...
sorry...no one here is any longer saying...Hmmmm...

quote:
Originally posted by Ironman64:
For those that think CSHD is toast or are losing hope, think on these questions:

* Why hasn't the 5-star General that was on an early PR with the UN Ambassador, a director, raise a stink if Harris/CSHD is a scam?
* Why hasn't the UN filed just one charge or refute anything?
* Why hasn't the VENZ government thrown a fit over the bonds?
* Why didn't TD Ameritrade, after being openly accused of NSS and other unsavory behavior, file anything like a C&D or even deny the claim?
* Why have several shareholders with connections met with brick walls any inquiry they have made with colleagues regarding CSHD?

Lots more questions, very few answers. Ever wonder why?


 
Posted by Mr. CATIAEngineer on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by IrishLife2:
quote:
Originally posted by wallymac:
quote:
Originally posted by Ironman64:
You haven't been paying attention then. [Wink]

To what? Mark this post? I know from reliable source but won't divulge? An FBI guy winked at me?

Get real.

Wallymac...this is just RonBurgundy in a new movie roll...Iron Man! Consider the source! LOL
[Were Up]
 
Posted by PCola77 on :
 
Here's what I don't get. based on reading Ironman's posts, it's pretty obvious tha he feels it's a 100%, slamdunk, that this will work out. He's "hinting" like crazy, and seems to want peopel to figure out what will happen. Well then, why not just flat out say it? Will you "jeopardize the mission" if you say what you know? can't be, otherwise you wouldn't be egging people on to try to figure it out.

So why not just say something like:

Person 1, Person 2, and Person 3 were involved by: (selling restricted shares, selling counterfeit shares, committing beastiality with Rufus' horses, etc.)

They will "get what's coming to them" by: (going to jail, paying restitution, having Rufus's horses return the favor, etc.)

People who losts 10s of thousands of dollars in this will get their money back because: (illegal shares will be cancelled and brokers will have to buy them back, the parties named above will have to reimburse them directly, there will be a $10 per person ticket cost for people to watch the above mentioned "horse reve