posted
QUOTE by Wallace [ Forget it! I already bought all the diamonds he has mined. ]
OK shakeman what did you do with the diamond that got stuck in the 2inch pipe!!!All this time you have been bashing you have been secretly buying all the diamonds. What a guy...
IP: Logged |
posted
Wassamadderwiya, Dusty, I never saw the one in the pipe! That just might have been the biggie! On second thought, it was probably too small to bother with.
IP: Logged |
STOCKGATE TODAY An online newspaper reporting the issues of Securities Fraud
SEC Admits to Fraud and Enacts Scheme to Cover-Up – March 30, 2005
David Patch
In the April 2005 publication of Euromoney, the Magazine places it focus squarely on the issue of naked shorting. In three separate articles, European authors Helen Avery and Peter Koh attempt to dig into the US Financial Market scandal to uncover what “Stockgate” is truly about. Their efforts only raise greater doubts about the SEC’s objectivity to this issue.
Case in point.
In June 2004 when the SEC released Regulation SHO they imposed a clause that seemed bizarre. They put a clause in the language that ultimately “grandfathered” all prior open fails from mandatory closeout provisions. If the fails represented illegal trading that was not to be corrected by this reform.
Questioned about this clause by the authors, SEC Asst. Director of Market Regulation James Brigagliano had this to say, “We were concerned about generating volatility where there were large pre-existing open positions, and we wanted to start afresh with new regulation, not re-write history”
Lets analyze this statement.
Since the inception of SHO in January, many stocks have seen huge volatility unseen prior to January 7, 2005 when the first threshold lists were released. Unlike volatility created due to upward buying pressures we have seen volatility swings of 20% or more in “bear raid” like selling tactics. So while upside volatility and short selling profitability has been protected, longs shareholders continue to be abused by the manipulation that has abused them in the past. I guess the SEC underestimated the integrity of the markets. The volatility we see on these stocks, unparallel to the rest of the markets, should certainly be cause for concern.
Mr. Brigagliano also references the existence of “large pre-existing open positions”. I gather Mr. Brigagliano, speaking for the SEC, never considered that those large open positions might be impacting the markets in these stocks? How exactly a large open position is created and how it may not be good for the markets appears to be puzzling to the Asst. Director. Ironically, the Securities Act of 1934 states unequivocally that settlement fails are in fact harmful to the markets and investors. I would almost suggest the Division of Market Regulation may benefit from taking a day and reading the Securities Act once again.
What also must be considered regarding Regulation SHO is that the SEC allowed six months for the industry to prepare for the compliance to the new rules. Rules by the way that mimicked pre-existing SRO rules in place. So I guess the statement of “start fresh” by Mr. Brigagliano meant with respect to recording failures since the rules themselves are actually old. Logically, if these fails were legitimate in the first place six months would be more than ample time to cover the large open positions in these securities. Any that exists after the six months are problem trades that need immediate attention, as there are no legal grounds for fails to persist for six months. Not even with exemptions.
The Congressional agenda of the SEC is to protect all investors. Instead of Investor protection the SEC pardoned the open positions from being closed any time soon. They must have some VERY LARGE open positions to justify such a policy as it goes against every theory of investor protection according to the Securities Act of 1934 (Section 17A).
Mr. Brigagliano followed up his justifications by saying "When you look at some of the complaints from issuers, you have to ask yourself is naked shorting really the problem here? Some of these companies have had serious financial and regulatory issues that may have been the cause for their stock price falling."
Unfortunately this tact of “blame the issuer” only works if there is no large open position on the issuer’s stock. It is an easy out for the SEC to look at a company’s financials and justify a stock valuation because of it. Unfortunately it is not the SEC’s role to review a company’s financials; their role is to make sure the trading on the security has taken place in a legal manner. If there are large open positions, regardless of the financial qualifications of the issuer, the fails must be evaluated for manipulation. Manipulating a financially troubled company is no more legal than manipulating General Electric I don’t think. Maybe I should quiz Mr. Brigagliano on this. I am sure he has a rational justification to pull out of the SEC Q & A handbook. Ultimately the markets are what will dictate stock valuations assuming the markets are traded fairly.
Again, case in point.
In September of 2004 Mr. Brigagliano directed a response to an inquiry by Senator Paul Sarbanes about possible naked shorting abuses. The Senator was specific in his request to the SEC even providing e-mail evidence by Broker/Dealers and the Canadian Depository discussing their inability to settle the trades of a particular “complaining issuer”.
The response from Mr. Brigagliano was simple. The April 2003 Broker/Dealer e-mail acknowledgements of large open positions were to be attributed to a June 2004 corporate action taken by the company. No my dates are not messed up, Mr. Brigagliano tried to blame the fails on a corporate action that happened 14 months after the e-mails were written.
The SEC never did officially review the cause for the fails as they continue placing all the blame on the issuer. As for those fails, they were acknowledged to be real by the Wall Street firms themselves. Those were the “Red Flag” e-mails the SEC promised not to ignore in prior Senate Hearings. Apparently Mr. Brigagliano was sleeping in his office during those hearings and missed the Chairman’s promises not to ignore them again.
So let’s take Mr. Brigagliano to task even further, as he apparently wants to represent the SEC’s position here.
In a December 13, 2004 Bear Stearns Conference Call the General Counsel had this to say about Regulation SHO.
“To give you that brief introduction in Reg SHO, the history how we got to where we are today. For the past several years we have been hearing from many different regulators regarding their concerns about the increase in the level of fails that they are seeing. They believe, and they have stated on numerous occasions, that one of the primary causes of the high level of fails was that various participants in the short sale process, prime brokers, executing brokers, clients, were not following already established rules.”
By this statement the SEC has not only been aware that the large open positions have existed for years, they acknowledge that these large open positions were conducted under trading practices that were not in sync with established laws. Regulators were so brash as to tell firms they were in violation yet did nothing about it.
By protecting these large open positions with Regulation SHO the SEC was in fact protecting the fraudulent actions of the markets. How exactly do the regulators expect credibility over those they regulate if they acknowledge securities fraud yet take no action? Are these the open positions James Brigagliano was defending?
Finally, before I let Mr. Brigagliano off the hook we can review a report that came out of a visiting economic scholar at the SEC. The report by visiting University of New Mexico Professor Leslie Boni was referenced as a key document used in the determination of Regulation SHO guidelines. The report by the professor claims that the large open positions are in fact Strategic Fails created by Wall Street for economic purposes. When compliance ran up against margins, margins won and the professor laid it all out for the SEC.
The SEC conducts their own study, determines one of the causes for the fails in the system are financially driven to benefit Wall Street Institutions and the SEC elects to protect these fails. Are these the actions of an Agency looking out for the best interests of the investor? Volatility in forcing an Industry correction to be in compliance would be a bad thing Jimmie?
Okay, so enough with Mr. Brigagliano and his ill-equipped comments. Let’s step over to another SEC Market Regulation Attorney and see how we can analyze her comments.
Again in one of the three Euromoney articles released, the issue as to why the SEC does not publish the fail positions in the reported threshold companies was asked of the SEC. In response, “Susan Petersen, a special counsel in the SEC's division of market regulation, says that it does not make public the exact amount of fails-to-deliver, as it would potentially have negative effects on investors and broker/dealers by revealing trading strategies.”
Ms. Petersen clearly appears confused over who it is the agency is supposed to protect. Investors and Broker/Dealers have no rights to trading strategies if they are the ones generating the excessive fails. To generate a fail means you are not trading real shares and thus trading counterfeit stocks. The only possible trading strategy in this case would be to manipulate the stock with excess supply beyond reasonable and legal means. Is that the strategy the SEC is protecting?
For the record, market makers are given an exemption to conduct bona fide market making but if they are the ones generating “large open positions” I would beg to differ on this being bona fide market making strategies. These exemptions provided to market makers are intended to be short term and to knock down the stock volatility created due to sudden spikes in liquidity. For their positions to grow to the point of large open positions and extended for large durations of time would mean that temporary volatility is no longer the trading strategy of the investing public. If there is that much buying volume that requires large amounts of naked shorting to diffuse growth, the demand is dictating a new stock valuation level is required and does not require excessive market making corrections.
It is clear by the comments of Ms. Petersen that the negative effects of the long investors are not the primary concern of the SEC. The SEC is more concerned about the protection of those market participants that have created this alternate market by trading counterfeit securities to manipulate valuations. Dare I say – Hedge Funds? Who else has enough financial leverage in the markets and political leverage in Washington to trade counterfeit shares in excessive of what exists and is available and never be forced to deliver?
To review the actions of the SEC with regards to naked shorting, the SEC has done the equivalent of erasing the past of all research analysts’ conflicts, all past mutual fund late trading activities, and all prior IPO allocations issues. On those acts of fraud the SEC did not grandfather in the past and start fresh as Mr. Brigagliano put it, they fined Wall Street tens of billions of dollars. They did so because it was right even if it was only a fraction of what was lost. In this case the stakes are higher, premiums will be paid and investor losses would be restored. Not at a fraction of the cost but at full value. The SEC is afraid of imposing such penalties upon Wall Street and thus grandfathered in their fraud.
The ultimate question at the end of the day is simple. What was the SEC thinking in trying to cover-up the fraud of illegal and abusive naked shorting? They have admitted it exists with every reference made to large open positions. With decades of complaints, an environment of public distrust, and dozens of present state and federal lawsuits pending did the SEC really think the data would never be disclosed? The arrogance exposed by these SEC officials in the Euromoney articles continues to highlight the denial the SEC is in. They really still hold down the belief that Wall Street will monitor and correct itself.
Guess again.
For a full expose on the illegal practice watch NBC’s Dateline Sunday April 10, 2005 @ 7:00 EST. Decide for yourself what side of the fence the SEC calls their home.
IP: Logged |
jcline 05 Apr 2005, 11:38 PM EDT Msg. 189643 of 189668 Jump to msg. # Open Letter to Depository Trust and Clearing Corporation First Deputy General Counsel Larry Thompson on the Largest Breach of Public Trust in History
PLANTATION, FLORIDA, April 5, 2005, /PRNewswire-FirstCall/ -- Eagletech Communications Inc. (OTCPK: EATC), today released its response to the Depository Trust and Clearing Corporation First Deputy General Counsel Larry Thompson’s recent postings at http://www.dtcc.com/ seeking to mislead the public about the DTCC’s role in the largest breach of public trust in history.
Dear Mr. Thompson:
I wish to remind you that on March 4, 2005 Eagletech Communications, Inc.’s Attorneys announced the ruling of the Supreme Court of the State of New York, wherein the DTCC was compelled to produce the Company’s trading records
Today, more than one month later, the records have not been forthcoming as ordered by the court. Instead, as First Deputy General Counsel for the DTCC, I believe you have undertaken a campaign to disseminate misinformation, lies, and half-truths when confronted with facts made public by your detractors.
On March 5, 2005 one day after the announcement of the aforementioned court ruling, your interview @dtcc.com, entitled “Naked Short Selling and the Stock Borrow Program”, stated: “One of these companies has been cited for failing to file financial statements since 2001.” Congratulations! You did get one right. On February 15, 2005, the Securities and Exchange Commission deemed it necessary for the protection of investors to institute proceedings pursuant to Section 12(j) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 In the Matter of Eagletech Communications, Inc., Respondent.
On the same day The SEC also filed an Enforcement Action against 17 Defendants, all associated with the Company’s first Investment Banking firm, for manipulation of the Company’s stock. Also on that day, a New Jersey Grand Jury unsealed an Indictment charging 4 of the 17 with criminal charges. I was not surprised since the evidence used by the SEC and the Justice Department in both investigations was obtained from discovery in the Company’s 2001 civil lawsuit against several of the same perpetrators. The evidence was obtained from defendants residing in the Bahamas, outside both of the agencies’ jurisdictions. Plaintiff’s Attorneys shared the discovery evidence freely with the investigative agencies.
What was surprising was that the Company’s three official complaints of naked short selling, counterfeiting of the Company’s stock, and other criminal misconduct made in 2002 to the SEC were to my knowledge ignored. The first complaint to the SEC transmitted the Company’s civil lawsuit alleging that 5 of the managing directors of Salomon Smith Barney along with other SSB employees worked in concert with criminal securities manipulators.
Three years of evidence gathering implicates now convicted securities manipulator Anthony Elgindy, his associate Peter Michaelson, members of organized crime, manipulator Jonathan Curshen, his Offshore Management Company Red Sea Management, Market Makers WIEN Securities, Knight Securities, and scores of Wall Street professionals. Additional evidence obtained from the SEC’s own website contributes to the description of a scheme to destroy the value of the Company’s stock and ultimately the Company for the profit of the perpetrators. A second complaint to the SEC resulted in the presentation of pattern of evidence of naked short selling and counterfeiting of securities in 200 companies, to SEC Enforcement Attorney Justin Arnold at a meeting in the SEC’s Miami office. The third complaint submitted by U.S. Congressman Peter Deutsch on the Company’s behalf received no acknowledgement from the SEC at all.
Mr. Thompson, in your interview you state (referring to Eagletech): “Frankly we believe that the allegations are an attempt to purposely mislead those who are not familiar with this program.” Consider this. Forensic Economist and Professor of Finance at Fordham University Graduate School of Business, John D. Finnerty after four years of research in March 2005 released what will likely become the definitive work on this subject for Juries across America. In his 73 page Treatise entitled, Short Selling, Death Spiral Convertibles, and the Profitability of Stock Manipulation, Professor Finnerty on page 37 has this to say about the Stock Borrow program:
“…The stock borrow program can facilitate naked shorting in two ways. First, sellers can continue to fail to deliver because the NSCC can borrow the shares it needs to meet its clearing obligations through the stock borrow program. It does not have to force the seller who fails to deliver to buy in shares, nor does it have to go into the market to buy in the shares. It simply borrows them from another member firm to effect the buy-in. Since the NSCC covers the short position, the buyer of the stock also never has to buy them in. Second, the stock borrow program allows the shares to be recycled. Each stock loan gives rise to another stock futures contract. Any single share could actually be relent multiple times, giving rise to multiple futures contracts. Each futures contract credited to a broker-dealer’s sub-account at the DTC continues to be reported on the broker-dealer’s books as a share held either in its proprietary account or in a customer account. In either case, the account holder believes he owns a real share with all the rights attached to it. Consequently, the stock borrow program effectively creates additional unauthorized shares of the issuer’s stock. These undated stock futures contracts, which the financial press has referred to as phantom shares, inflate the amount of stock that is available for trading and also increase the amount of stock that is available for lending to short sellers…” The entire text is available for download at: http://papers.ssrn.com/abstract=687282.
Mr. Thompson maybe you don’t realize that just as it is against the law to counterfeit United States currency it is also a Class B Federal felony punishable by up to 25 years in prison to create counterfeit corporate securities. The law makes no distinction between the counterfeiting of a development stage startup public company and for example, Microsoft Corporation. By the way, while listed on the “Pink Sheets” in 1975 Microsoft reported three employees and income of $16,000 for the period. Lucky for Microsoft that the Stock Borrow program wasn’t created until 1981! Lucky for me, I could be typing this letter on a typewriter! I’ve included this link to United States Code, Title 18, Chapter 25, Section 514, also refer to Section 513 for definitions: http://caselaw.lp.findlaw.com/casecode/uscodes/18/parts/i/chapters/25/toc.html.
Eagletech Communications, Inc. representing itself Pro Se has answered the charges of the SEC with the Affirmative Defense that grandfathering all pre-Regulation SHO delivery failures and that seeking to de-register the Company’s stock in order to protect future shareholders is a subterfuge to misrepresent its real intentions. In my opinion this action against the Company is designed to conceal its own culpability in, using the SEC’s own words, “delivery failures greater than a company’s total public float.” De-registration of the Company’s shares stands to reward manipulators just as a bankruptcy would, since the manipulators would never have to purchase the stock to close out delivery failures still on the DTCC’s books. In my opinion the SEC’s decision to grandfather known criminal securities manipulation has violated the Constitutional 5th Amendment rights of Eagletech shareholders by an inverse taking of their property without due process and without compensation.
In a motion to SEC Administrative Law Judge William T. Kelley filed on March 22, 2005, I have asked that the approximately 100 pages of evidence of criminals in the act of manipulating the Company’s stock filed with the Company’s answer, and by reference Eagletech’s trading records ordered to be produced by the DTCC, be referred to the U.S. Secret Service, the U.S. Justice department and as 18-USC-514 states “any other such agency having such authority.
Since the DTCC is incorporated as a State of New York Special Purpose Trust Banking Organization I believe Elliot Spitzer, New York’s Attorney General, would have that authority. It would also appear that the SEC’s Congressional Oversight Committees, the Senate Banking Committee and the House Financial Services Committee would have such authority to investigate these crimes. Since viewing Senator Robert Bennett’s impassioned admonition to SEC Chairman William Donaldson in a Senate Banking Committee hearing that “Regulation SHO in not working” I have hope that other members of the SEC’s Oversight Committees can be convinced to take a serious look at this issue.
For your convenience I have included a link to the video record of the hearing: After installing Real Player navigate to 1:19:30 for video of the Senators admonishment,
The appropriate response to this letter would be with facts not rhetoric. In the @dtcc interview you ask yourself the question “does the Stock Borrow program counterfeit shares?” Only by producing Eagletech’s court ordered trading records will the real answer be known!
In addition, would you please include with any response to this letter, (1) your Bar number and (2) the State in which you are admitted to practice law. And just so there is no confusion about the authenticity of my allegations I will be posting the evidence of the alleged criminal misconduct on the Company’s website at http://www.eagletech1.com/.
Sincerely,
Rodney E. Young
Eagletech Communications, Inc.
Founder, President, CEO, and Sole Protector of Existing Shareholder Property Rights!
This press release may contain forward-looking statements. Forward-looking statements are inherently subject to risks and uncertainties, some of which cannot be predicted, or quantified. Future events and actual results could differ materially from those set forth in, contemplated by, or underlying the forward-looking statements. The risks and uncertainties to which forward-looking statements are subject include, but are not limited to, governmental regulation, competition, and other material risks.
IP: Logged |
posted
IMO, if all this comes to be true, Wall Street is run by a bunch of crooks. Not that this surprises me, but there is a possibility of another stock market crash. If these people dont fix the problem, the entire body of investors will lose faith in the whole idea, and shut it down by withdrawing all their funds from the market. This whole thing gives me a very bad feeling.
-------------------- If I give you bad information, please feel free to sue me. I have nothing left anyway. Ed
IP: Logged |
posted
Question - If the current (Yahoo) day’s range for CMKX is 0.0001 - 0.0001, and there is 112,634,789 in volume then was it all sells at .0001 and buys at .0001? If that's the case then the only one that is making money is the brokerage account for there processing fee? Still waiting for my early Xmas present for a sell at .0002. In not, I should get the certs printed they may be cheaper than TP... IMHO. Cowboy...
IP: Logged |
posted
Streamers only show bid/ask in the 4th digit. But MM's actually trade in the 5th digit. So when you see .0001/.0001 it probably more like .00005/.0001 maybe. Also just because it shows .0001/.0002 the trades still actually could be .00007/.00015 and rounded off.
-------------------- Invest with your brain not with your heart.
IP: Logged |
posted
george ..didn't you know?? this is the cmkx pro basher board...well all except me & legel. legel is the residenant cult member & i just volenteer my time.
-------------------- "keep your stick on the ice & your cup firmly in place"
IP: Logged |
posted
it was a pr ed..lol word for word the last pr. sure glad they are so intent on informing shareholders imagine how little we would know if they wanted to hide stuff.
-------------------- "keep your stick on the ice & your cup firmly in place"
IP: Logged |
ok this has to be the most foolish pr crap ever. from zoomingstocks today. questions about cmkx emailed in ------------------------------------------------
Are the CMKX Owners making money and doing well?
That is doubtful. The CMKX Management is expending monies for drilling operations, attorneys, the CMKXtreme Machine and other racing ventures. Based on common knowledge and the things we know about CMKX there is no revenue stream coming into the company. They have a high monthly burn-rate because of ongoing activities and no money coming in that has been reported. They have yet to issue any reports about the sale of property, diamonds or anything. Therefore, it is difficult to believe that they are making any money.
Additionally, a company only makes money on their initial entry into the market. This means an Initial Public Offering or a Reverse Merger into the market through a shell, which is what CMKM Diamonds did a couple of years ago when they bought the CMKI shell. Subsequent sale of stock is in the market and only market makers and brokers make money from the transactions. Therefore, CMKX has not made any money on the sale of stock in the market since on or about September 2002. Subsequent issuances of stock are usual for stock equity financing or stock swapping.
---------------------------------------------
ok lets see UC just bought a $3.5 million home...must be from that job at mickey d's. stock equity financing or stock swapping???? PLEASE GET REAL!!! thats so da** stupid it defies all brain matter. ya think maybe that financing came from selling more shares into the market??? maybe zooming had normal brain power just zoom over his head. does this clown think ppl are that stupid to just read that crap & believe it?? oh ya i forgot, cmkx cult would call that serious "DD".
-------------------- "keep your stick on the ice & your cup firmly in place"
IP: Logged |
posted
Zooming stocks is run by the guy that Will and I met at the races. He's the guy who swore up and down that "we have the goods" but couldn't say what those goods were even though he claimed to have no ties to the company. Goes by the name of ElCamino on other boards.
IP: Logged |
posted
Yea he's the selfordained reverend guy. He was gonna give the convocation prayer at the October meeting until that crazed women wanted to rip everyone's sack off.
-------------------- A million seconds is 13 days. A billion seconds is 31 years.
IP: Logged |
posted
Further more I know all of you talk about me behind my back! I know this because I can here you............. We are very lucky here at Happy Farm estates we have several Dr.'s who stay here..They ain't very smart though....I told them I think I have a hemorrhoid, but they keep looking in the wrong place...They look in my eyes,, ears,, and mouth... They keep saying I am para some thing or other.... They also like me,,, they say I am some thing else...I don't want to hurt there feelings,,by leaving,,, so I will keep them company for a little while longer.
IP: Logged |
posted
I think that was clearly reported by the fools that attended the big UCAD/CMKX Vegas bash.
One of the best legal reposts I have seen is where the guy met Urban at the race, and asked about the incident. He said Urban aknowledged it with a smile and a wave off, and a "let's not go there" comment. WTF is that? I think I would have had to say, no, tell me about it, Moe. That woman wanted blood, and you tossed her in the street like a piece of garbage. Just remember, if you're still holding old Urban and gang have your very best interest at heart, and soon you will be joining the crazed woman who was tossed in the street. I understand the buyout amount has been adjusted downward, between .10 and .27, lets see, at 703B O/S that will come to only: over 70B$ to 189B$ lol. Citicorp will spend that on two diamond flakes big enough to make earings for a flea. Stop yourself, foolish faithful, take your couple of grand for your $10,000's and move on. Quit lying to yourselves and everyone else.
-------------------- A million seconds is 13 days. A billion seconds is 31 years.
IP: Logged |
posted
Well, now that I know there was a crazy woman ripping sacks off I'm pretty glad I didn't attend that party. If I remember right Will I was trying to talk you into going out there with me. I'd feel pretty bad if you came back as a eunuch and it was my fault you were there in the first place. That one would be pretty hard to live down.
IP: Logged |
posted
I don't think she was looking to "work" the crowd. I think she wanted some CMKX management parts. Like Urban's or Melvin's or the highly regarded, now frowned on Mr. "GOD ALL MIGHTY" Roger Glenn. Afterall, we are just commoners, know nothing slobs. We're not celebrities, are little parts aren't woth anything compared to the brass these conmen sport. For them to have gotten away with this deal, and still be held in high esteem by these crazies, they have to have huge brass parts.
-------------------- A million seconds is 13 days. A billion seconds is 31 years.
IP: Logged |
posted
LOL Will! You do sure have a way with words,"to rip everyone's OUCH off."
Mr. "GOD ALL MIGHTY" Roger Glenn may have done his job.I believe the audit back in June last year did take place,and I think that could be why we are where we are.
IP: Logged |
posted
Funny thing is, you never really know, do you, childman? They might have done this and they might have done that, but the "Master Plan", and the Debeer's spy network and cut throat compeition just never allowed them to publish anything. Well, let me tell you something, they never did sh*t, but take the money and run. They didn't get much from me. Bet they sure got a lot from those freaky "I'm buying more", "it's on sale at this price", "got to buy at this discounted price", idiots. ........and they still aren't finished ten's of thousands of dollars flushed by them, and they are still believing in this freakshow. Absolutely insane, but the good part of that is, I didn't pay their tuition through crazy school.
-------------------- A million seconds is 13 days. A billion seconds is 31 years.
IP: Logged |
posted
I remember the genius faithful started a thread, how many shares of CMKX do you own. They were all proud to be owning 10's of millions of shares. I'd like to see just 1/2 of those mopes come back and start a thread now, how much money they lost on CMKX. Of course, they would tell you they lost nothing because they haven't sold, and still feel good and believe that this is a play of a life time. So, maybe they haven't lost, (past tense), but they sure are losing now. (Btw that makes them losers). C'mon, one of you proud owners of this crap start a thread for those big hitters that couldn't buy enough trouble months ago. Speak up you soon to be rich fanatasy folk.
-------------------- A million seconds is 13 days. A billion seconds is 31 years.
IP: Logged |
posted
So what you are saying, Hwy, is that RG did the audit and it was not released for some odd reason? I doubt it. His job was legal, not auditing. Had he accomplished anything at all, I am sure he would have made it well known....lawyers do that kind of thing. No matter what his job was or how one looks at it, he did not come through for shareholders, did he? Now he's gone? No visible concrete results!! Packed his bags rather fast, didn't he?
IP: Logged |
posted
Will, I doubt if many will show their shameful faces. Don't you remember the numbers of them that insisted they would say they were wrong if it became obvious. They have all been blinded by "the light"!!
posted
Now, now, Shakeman. There, I capped it to show my respect and reverence for you. I say it with humble adoration for my good friend Wallace. You should be proud of yourself that I would honor with such a sterling nickname. (No Sterling pun intended, my friend). However, you should be ashamed of yourself, while your saintly wife was eating a meager meal of fish, you were gorging yourself on Ham & Cheese sandwiches and Shakes, Shakeman! Now you might ask, how do I know your wife is saintly. Well, I never spoke with her at length, but I have spoken with you, and if she puts up with you, Shakeman, she has to be a saint.
-------------------- A million seconds is 13 days. A billion seconds is 31 years.
IP: Logged |
posted
turkeybreath? Now what the heck is that? I still like Shakeman, and it appears others do too. I think it's gonna stick, Shakeman, unlike turkeybreath. Just remember who your only friend was when the faithful declared you the anti-Christ. I stuck with you, Shakeman, even at the risk of eternal damnation!
-------------------- A million seconds is 13 days. A billion seconds is 31 years.
IP: Logged |
Topic Closed
UBBFriend: Email this page to someone!
Printer-friendly view of this topic
![[Eek!]](eek.gif)
how many shares?
