You wrote: "Here's your Chief Wall Street DDer Wallace. Must be getting pretty hot in that kitchen:
SEC ENFORCEMENT CHIEF TO RESIGN" *************************************
Hell, looks to me like he was trying to do a good job penalizing where due. Wish I had been there to give him a hand (both to help and to shake).
What he appeared to be doing seems to me to have been a positive for shareholders and their interests. Why do you take it negatively? Probably he got burned out and tired of fighting any longer.
And, legal, I did take note of your attempt to distort what I previously posted about DD. Try to learn something instead of distorting and diverting.
IP: Logged |
posted
SEC Delivers a Chorus of Misleading Information – April 13, 2005
Dave Patch's view of the new publication
STOCKGATE TODAY- April 13, 2005 An online newspaper reporting the issues of Securities Fraud
SEC Delivers a Chorus of Misleading Information – April 13, 2005
David Patch
The Securities and Exchange Commission, responsible for the enforcement of the dissemination of accurate information from our publicly traded corporations may have just violated their own standards for clear and accurate dissemination of information. The SEC Division of Market Regulation, best labeled the “Ostrich Gang” for their innate ability to bury their heads in the sand, has tried to spin the fraudulent act of naked shorting abuses on the corporate officers of those complaining about the abuse itself. Forgotten by the SEC is that they admit the fraudulent act occurs in the first place.
The SEC publication came out on April 11, 2005 so let’s grab some of the excerpts and start dissecting truth from fiction.
SEC: Although the vast majority of short sales are legal, abusive short sale practices are illegal.
DP: This would be a simple admission that there are in fact illegal short sale strategies taking place in the markets. Vast Majority does not represent all short sales but only a majority.
SEC: [Re: Naked Shorting] For example, broker-dealers that make a market in a security generally stand ready to buy and sell the security on a regular and continuous basis at a publicly quoted price, even when there are no other buyers or sellers. Thus, market makers must sell a security to a buyer even when there are temporary shortages of that security available in the market. This may occur, for example, if there is a sudden surge in buying interest in that security, or if few investors are selling the security at that time.
DP: So, Market Makers can sell securities naked to make a market when no natural order flow of supply and demand exists? A Market Maker can create a new stock valuation solely independent of what shareholder supply and demand supports and when they do so, they don’t have any responsibility to deliver. And this is good for investors how? Exactly how does the SEC monitor such trading activities to insure “bear raids” and manipulation is not occurring especially in light of the magnitude of pre-existing fails?
SEC: [RE: Grandfathering Under SHO] The grandfathering provisions of Regulation SHO were adopted because the Commission was concerned about creating volatility where there were large pre-existing open positions. The Commission will continue to monitor whether grandfathered open fail positions are being cleaned up under existing delivery and settlement guidelines or whether further action is warranted.
It is important to note that the "grandfathering" clause of the Regulation does not affect the Commission's ability to prosecute violations of law that may involve such securities or violations that may have occurred before the adoption of Regulation SHO or that occurred before the security became a threshold security.
DP: The SEC, in protecting those who generated large failed positions that may or may not be legal positions, elected to “grandfather” all past failures regardless of their legal standing. The fact that the SEC approved this rule change 6-months ahead of the incorporation date, representing plenty of time to slowly close out any large failed positions, seems a concept the SEC cannot grasp. Instead, the SEC concept is to allow a slow matriculation of the short coverings of these illegal trades thus protecting the profits of those who initiated the illegal trades in the first place. A novel concept in investor protection; protect the criminal. Since SHO was incorporated in fact the volatility on “threshold Securities” has increased with a net loss in market capitalization.
As for the SEC’s threat of enforcement on those grandfathered fails, the SEC has zero past enforcement history on the illegal trading associated with naked shorting and settlement failures. ZERO! In fact, Regulation SHO is nearing 3-months into its incorporation period and the SEC has yet to scheduled audits to investigate the system fails. What are they waiting for, the criminals to get away?
SEC: [RE: Naked Shorting Abusive or Illegal] Selling stock short and failing to deliver shares at the time of settlement with the purpose of driving down the security's price. This manipulative activity, in general, would violate various securities laws, including Rule 10b-5 under the Exchange Act. Regulation SHO does not address this issue.
DP: When the SEC proposed SHO they claimed that Naked Shorting provided the seller with additional leverage and could use that leverage to manipulate a stock. The SEC has publicly acknowledged naked shorting as a reality. Why then has the SEC failed to take any enforcement actions against those who committed naked shorting abuses if there are “various securities laws” being violated? Worse, if SHO did not address this because it already pre-existed as a violation, where have the activities been? We did not need SHO to spurn SEC enforcement actions they already had pre-existing laws to utilize.
Is the SEC now claiming that when they drafted SHO, and determined that “large” pre-existing fails existed, that all these fails were of legal standing? They have to have come to that conclusion since they “grandfathered” the fails from mandatory closeout and we are well past that period when the SEC had this evidence and first drafted the document for public comment.
SEC: [RE: Did my Stock Lose Value due to Naked Shorting] There are many reasons why a stock may decline in value….The main factor determining the demand for a stock is the quality of the company itself. If the company is fundamentally strong, that is, if it is generating positive income, its stock is less likely to lose value.
There also may be instances where a company insider or paid promoter provides false and misleading excuses for why a company's stock price has recently decreased. For instance, these individuals may claim that the price decrease is a temporary condition resulting from the activities of naked short sellers. The insiders or promoters may hope to use this misinformation to move the price back up so they can dump their own stock at higher prices.
Naked short selling, however, can have negative effects on the market. Fraudsters may use naked short selling as a tool to manipulate the market. Market manipulation is illegal. The SEC has toughened its rules and is vigilant about taking actions against wrongdoers, but we can't stop every fraud.
DP: This is a long one so I have to break it down into several parts.
First, if a stock is based on supply and demand then why do we have market makers trading a market when there is no supply available at somebody’s demand? Better still, why do you identify that market makers will trade the stock when there is NO supply or demand simply to create the appearance of trading volume?
Now we can delve into the – blame the issuer – routine of the SEC. Of course the SEC highlights all the nefarious acts of those they despise and try to generalize it to all but, can the SEC provide to us the evidence for each that has complained that will show that each does not in fact have large pre-existing fails? The reality is, those corrupt executives and stock promoters are allowed to take on this battle cry due to the shear negligence of the SEC to nip this issue in the butt back in 1999 when the people first publicly protested the fraud during an SEC short sale comment period. I would suggest the SEC immediately disclose to Congress the magnitude of settlement failures, with documented evidence to back it up, for each of the issuers who have voiced concern over the naked shorting abuses. Let Congress decide who is telling the truth.
“But we can’t stop all fraud”. No, but you certainly can “grandfather” the fraud you want to ignore. The fact remains; the SEC has received tens of thousands of complaints, captured audiotapes of broker/dealers being bribed to manipulate a stock [RE: SEC vs. Rhino Advisors] and yet the SEC took no actions against Wall Street. The General Counsel of Bear Stearns, on December 13, 2004, admitted that regulators have told them for years that these strategies of illegally selling were taking place – Yet NO ENFORCEMENT ACTIONS. A hollow threat is not about to scare an industry that is caught daily defrauding the investor.
SEC: [RE: Is it a violation of Law to Fail T+3 Settlement] Because the Commission recognized that there are many reasons why broker-dealers may fail to deliver securities on settlement date, it designed and adopted Rule 15c6-1 to prohibit broker-dealers from contracting to settle transactions later than T+3. However, failure to deliver securities on T+3 does not violate the rule.
DP: This is a joke. The SEC enacted a rule that they have never actively enforced. In fact, in researching the SEC website I could not pull up a single enforcement action pertaining to a Rule 15c6-1 violation. Ironically, an illegal trade [naked short] executed as a short sale, and caused for manipulation is in fact a violation of Rule 15c6-1. Obviously the Selling agent had no intention of meeting the terms of the contract. The very fact that the SEC acknowledges naked shorting abuses is fact that Rule 15c6-1 violations have and still occur without SEC enforcement. Exactly who was the SEC trying to impress here?
First year law students will tell you that to enter into a contract, in which you have no intention of meeting, and doing so under illegal grounds will void the contract. I guess the SEC attorneys missed that first year of law school. Certainly the author of this diatribe did.
SEC: [RE: Does Grandfathering allow the illegal trades to go unaddressed] Regulation SHO does not require close-outs of "grandfathered" fails. As noted above, "grandfathered" status applies where the fail position was established prior to the security becoming a threshold security. However, any new fails in a security on the threshold list are subject to the mandatory close-out provisions.
Any grandfathered position that resulted from illegal activity, such as manipulation, continues to be fully subject to redress by the Commission.
DP: The SEC has not yet taken any audits to review the grandfathered fails and to review the condition behind that fail. How exactly does the SEC plan on redressing this issue if they have not even started, or at least shown an appearance of starting, to care? Without an audit and with all past SEC actions coming against the issuers complaining, where is the credibility behind this statement. The SEC’s own visiting economic scholar drafter a document claiming the fails were strategically placed by the Industry for profit margins.
SEC: [Will Close-Outs drive stock values up] Close-out purchases of stock on threshold securities lists will not necessarily drive up prices of such stocks. One of the primary purposes of Regulation SHO is to clean up open fail positions in threshold securities when they reach a relatively low aggregate level, but not to cause short squeezes. The term "short squeeze" refers to the pressure on short sellers to cover their positions as a result of sharp price increases or difficulty in borrowing the security the sellers are short. The rush by short sellers to cover produces additional upward pressure on the price of the stock, which then can cause an even greater squeeze. Although some short squeezes may occur naturally in the market, a scheme to manipulate the price or availability of stock in order to cause a short squeeze is illegal.
DP: This is where the rubber meets the road. The SEC has been so fixated on preventing any possible short squeezes that they have allowed an equally illegal action to persist. If the SEC had mandated the large pre-existing fails be closed they feared that stock prices would increase due to the shorts being forced to cover. A novel idea but…is the stock artificially low because of the excessive, and illegal, shorts in the first place.
One misunderstanding about short squeezes is the actual price volatilities created. When a stock drops from $10:00/share it has lost 90% of market value and the SEC has willingly let this happen and happen due to illegal naked shorting. Today, the SEC is concerned about a possible squeeze by which the stock runs from a $1.00/share value to $10.00/share. An increase of 1000%. The fact remains, the stock only reached is post manipulation valuation.
Excessive shorting during the dot.com bubble, created by a lack of enforcement on naked shorting, created short squeezes that ran those stocks beyond market valuation means. It was partially the SEC’s fault as they ignored Rule 15c6-1 enforcement and the enforcement of trade settlements. Now they penalize all for their negligence at a time when some stocks are legitimately manipulated down. They continue to drive the market off the victims of fraud.
SEC: [RE: Does the NSCC create counterfeit shares] NSCC's stock borrow program, as approved by the Commission, permits NSCC to borrow securities from its participants for the purpose of completing settlements only if participants have made those securities available to NSCC for this purpose and those securities are on deposit in the participant's account at DTC.
DP: The SEC approved the NSCC stock borrow program as a temporary means to settle hiccups in the settlement system. Through a failure to manage this system the SEC, by their own admissions, are aware that the number of settlement failures have amassed to levels exceeding the entire public float of some companies. These fails have been masked by the NSCC stock borrow program and the continuous distribution of the same share through that system repeatedly. Under the NSCC system the failed trade, while on the books as a failure, has “settled” by DTCC standards because they cleared it using the stock borrow pool.
An example for you would be; Person A buys 100 shares on Monday that fails settlement on Thursday. The DTCC settles the trade through the stock borrow program using shares made available by the members. The shares delivered to person A, in the Name of Broker A, is made on Friday as borrowed shares. Broker A then takes those shares and places them back into the NSCC Stock Pool. Person A then buys another 100 shares the following Monday, the trade fails on Thursday, and the cycle repeats. That same person, over a month bought 400 shares with the same 100 shares being used 4 times. His or her own shares. Is it counterfeiting – for all practical purposes yes.
I conclude that this SEC piece of fiction has a purpose. For some reason the SEC Division of Market Regulation wants to paint a picture of a competence level that does not exist. The “Ostrich Gang” has taken a route that can only question exactly what it is they have to hide. Why deny what they themselves admit exists? Why generalize that it is all about poorly managed companies when it is Wall Street and the Wall street system that trades in naked shorting – not the companies?
Accountability is needed and needed immediately. The SEC can no longer be allowed to deceive the investing public with fiction intended to allow the criminals to get away. Who are these criminals the SEC is so intent on protecting anyway?
A request to the SEC pertaining to the author of this document yielded several conflicting responses. Not expected from an agency rife with conflicts of interest.
You wrote: "Here's your Chief Wall Street DDer Wallace. Must be getting pretty hot in that kitchen:
SEC ENFORCEMENT CHIEF TO RESIGN" *************************************
Hell, looks to me like he was trying to do a good job penalizing where due. Wish I had been there to give him a hand (both to help and to shake).
What he appeared to be doing seems to me to have been a positive for shareholders and their interests. Why do you take it negatively? Probably he got burned out and tired of fighting any longer.
And, legal, I did take note of your attempt to distort what I previously posted about DD. Try to learn something instead of distorting and diverting.
I don't view his departure as negative. He was either doing his job too well, or not well enough. Either way, it looks like the politicians above him didn't like it. Only time will tell.
IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Upside: Originally posted by drgnfly: [QUOTE]Just basic math shows he needs a diamond mine the state of NJ to to be able to move the PPS anywhere.
New Jersey is a pretty small state. You might want to look at the other coast. [/QUOTE ****************************************
Hey, knock it off. NJ is already known as the "garbage can of the East". We don't need Urban or any of his garbage too.
IP: Logged |
posted
Wallace don't even waste your time anymore, he can never answer back to a single a question. He only runs around reposting things from other sites, half the time he doesn't even bother to read it. Sad state of affairs for leagle when you invest more than you can afford to lose only to see it all fall apart. What sadder is blindly pumping away in hopes of getting any of it back.
Leagle the only people that will buy your nonsense are the CT's who invest based on wacky religous nonsense rather than with facts... but then again evolution never happened and dinosaurs never existed... right?
IP: Logged |
posted
legal wrote: "I don't view his departure as negative. He was either doing his job too well, or not well enough." *********************************
Sure, legal. That's why you made the reference "Here's you Wall Street DDer, Wallace".
I see legal added to the above post later.
IP: Logged |
posted
Look just because we had a corrupt gay governor that tripped while walking on the beach and broke his leg does not mean NJ == el stinky!
IP: Logged |
"Unfortunately management and others involved in CMKX's previous operations were not blessed with the trait of being perfectionists. Past professional guidance has left a void which prevented the Company's ability to prepare complete and accurate periodic reports under Section 12(g) of the Exchange Act,"
quote:Look just because we had a corrupt gay governor that tripped while walking on the beach and broke his leg does not mean NJ == el stinky!
It's got nothing to do with politics, the state smells, literally. Actually that's probably not fair on my part. I've only been to Atlantic City, twice. Both times it smelled like I imagine a barrel of dead fish left out in the sun would. Could have just been that refreshing ocean breeze too. Nice salt water taffy though.
IP: Logged |
I am really starting to wonder about the site, investigatethesec. They are the ones that said that Dateline was airing the NSS issue but Datelines website never said that it was going to air. Weeks before I started looking at the Website and never did they say they were airing the article. Yet the people that own these scam stocks like CMKX, PRRM, GXXL, and others were all over this website and its articles. Why does it seem that no well know news site air these articles. Just seems fishy to me.
I don't like the SEC myself in a llot of matters but it looks like this website will say anything to get people to come over to there site.
-------------------- Invest with your brain not with your heart.
IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Wallace#1: legal wrote: "I don't view his departure as negative. He was either doing his job too well, or not well enough." *********************************
Sure, legal. That's why you made the reference "Here's you Wall Street DDer, Wallace".
I see legal added to the above post later.
Grasping for straws now Wallace for something to come back with. So apparently you want my opinion on whether this guy was good or not? Aren't you the one telling everybody here that he permitted a scam stock to steal about $390 million from the American Public under his reign? Did he not notice the billions of shares traded daily, making CMKX the most traded stock in history, without launching an investigation months or years ago? Haven't you in effect been bashing him for not doing his DD and going after this company? So I don't know, man, you tell us if it is good or bad. You are the one who believes in Wall Street, not me.
IP: Logged |
posted
Still with all this so called DD, I have yet to see were its tied to CMKX. DD about other companies and about the SEC. Does NSS happen, of course, were is the link to CMKX. Could it have happened in the past when the o/s was lower. Good chance but still not proven. But after going from 200 then to 500 then to 800 A/S in a years, where did those 579 billion shares go that was issued since the a/s was 200 billion? And if it was to cover for NSS then why not tell us? Maybe, because its bad and UC is afraid what 10,000 shareholders will do to the new home?
-------------------- Invest with your brain not with your heart.
IP: Logged |
posted
No, legal, I do not want your opinion. I have very little, if any, respect for any of your wild opinions and speculations. Further, I find I must discount most of what you post as diversion and/or distortion. Generally, I do enjoy a good laugh from your posts though. That, I would probably miss when CMKX gets terminated.
IP: Logged |
I saw it. It brought to mind the quiet (had to be found out by researchers) increase of the authorized of CMKX from 500 bil to 800 bil shs. CMKX people better hope they didn't do the same thing!
IP: Logged |
posted
No one noticed noah's little addition to DD and research. He added a cute little phrase "reasonable opinion". So, you see from lack of real facts, and going ons in the universe, no matter how abstract, distant, and obscure, one can draw conclusions regarding CMKX through "reasonable opinion". That's what I guess all the Dr. D and Sterling crap is, "reasonable opinion". OH! By the way, only the faithful can have "reasonable opinion", not the negativity pumpers. LOL
-------------------- A million seconds is 13 days. A billion seconds is 31 years.
IP: Logged |
posted
Lately the sentiment seems to be that Urban got the shaft from people he trusted and he's just a lovable bungler. People are already forgiving him for mismanaging the company. In my opinion, that's a load of crap. There's no mismanagment here, there was nothing to mismanage the company never existed. Why do you think there are no corporate books or records? Because there is no company. This was a vehicle to wealth for Urban and family from the get go and they knew what they were doing. The naked short rumor was started by the company itself right after Urban took over and perpetuated by individuals who were either paid to do so or actually believed it. Either way, it started with Urban.
People question that if it is a scam, why would they be fighting for their lives in court? Ask yourself this, how could they possibly walk away from a scam of epic proportions without admitting guilt? What I see is the backpedaling and scrambling of a con man who is desparate to avoid jail time. He's doing every thing he possibly can to put an appearance of legitimacy on his scam and many, many people have fallen for it. Hopefully he won't get away with it. It would be nice to see justice served.
IP: Logged |
posted
Will, I thought it was "reasoned" opinion. But whichever, that is a dangerous concept in here. You see, "this POS is a SCAM" would be "reasoned opinion" to some because of the intellectual limitations of the "reasoner".
IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Upside: Lately the sentiment seems to be that Urban got the shaft from people he trusted and he's just a lovable bungler. People are already forgiving him for mismanaging the company. In my opinion, that's a load of crap. There's no mismanagment here, there was nothing to mismanage the company never existed. Why do you think there are no corporate books or records? Because there is no company. This was a vehicle to wealth for Urban and family from the get go and they knew what they were doing. The naked short rumor was started by the company itself right after Urban took over and perpetuated by individuals who were either paid to do so or actually believed it. Either way, it started with Urban.
People question that if it is a scam, why would they be fighting for their lives in court? Ask yourself this, how could they possibly walk away from a scam of epic proportions without admitting guilt? What I see is the backpedaling and scrambling of a con man who is desparate to avoid jail time. He's doing every thing he possibly can to put an appearance of legitimacy on his scam and many, many people have fallen for it. Hopefully he won't get away with it. It would be nice to see justice served.
Seems like we may have had this discussion before Up.
In an earlier post today I pointed out that Urban's sale of 779 billion shares @ an average of .0005, would have netted the company about $389,000,000.00. CMKX has always been a diamond exploration company, that means they have few hard assets, as they are simply offering shareholders a chance to explore with them in "hopes" of finding something.
If this were a "scam", all he had to do was announce that the company found nothing in it's explorations of it's claims; and simply walk away, a very wealthy man. Now that's a simplified explanation of how it would have wound down, but the idea is the same.
But he didn't walk away a wealthy man. So why is he still here? Still fighting. Still antagnozing the investigative agency. Still making public appearances at the track and socializing with shareholders. Still hauling around a film crew for the Trader Show. Still linked up with a man of more investigative talent, connections and resources, than perhaps the FBI itself. Still acquiring many more claims. Still branching out into many more entities.
Why not just walk with the $389 million?
IP: Logged |
posted
OK, so it is "reasoned opinion", sorry for misquoting, but you knew exactly what I meant. It's a dangerous concept anywhere. I see more circumstantial positives then negatives here. I know some scary facts: 703Billion O/S, as announced by the company, (FACT), suspension and on going investigation, (FACT), with a strong threat, probability, of revocation, (FACT). Most, if not all, your "reasoned opinions" are backed up with other "reasoned opinions", not facts. All I have ever asked for almost a year now, why isn't the company forthright and forthcoming with information. Much like ed has been asking lately. The only answers I have ever seen are subtle insults and "reasoned opinions" from you, debbie and other faithful.
CITICORP! That was "reasoned opinion" also, along with many others.
-------------------- A million seconds is 13 days. A billion seconds is 31 years.
IP: Logged |
posted
1 day all n/s's will get dealt with & i'd be seriously suprised if a lot of big heads didn't roll over it. but whats the point of n/s'ing a .0004 or a .0001 company that adds shares to the o/s by the hundreds of billions. this in a realty based mind would equal "reasonable opinion". there is zero proof that UC bought any of the o/s back except the 97 billion left of the a/s. if you remember a yr or so ago he did buy back 21 billion, thus the differance between the a/s & the divy split. 75 billion more in getting nevada minerals shares back. any thing over that is hopefull at best. there is "reasonable opinion" that he has not bought any further shares back. "reasonable opinion" would say that his family & other insiders own at least 100 billion shares & maybe a little more. but it ends there because "reasonable thinking" would tell a person that knows when a few hundred billion shares are added to the o/s buying any more would be foolish. thus a "reasonable opinion" would be that the float is between 550 & 600 billion. my guess is that last add to the o/s went to roger glen & is now in the open market. if this judge really wants transarancy we will know all these details in the next 100 days. i will even go out on a limb & say i predict these numbers will be right.
-------------------- "keep your stick on the ice & your cup firmly in place"
IP: Logged |
posted
and to answer the "control of the company" question? all UC needs is a few "prefered shares" with just the right specifications... like voting rights 100 million to one
-------------------- Don't envy the happiness of those who live in a fool's paradise.
IP: Logged |
posted
Don't forget bill, "reasoned opinion" from noah was that Urban sold the 97B to the MM's to help them cover their short position. There was a settlement for an unknown amount, and the MM's traded the 97B at .0001 to cover. "reasoned opinion" told us that the O/S was increased to 800B.
-------------------- A million seconds is 13 days. A billion seconds is 31 years.
IP: Logged |
posted
Legal, why didn't you post this E-mail from Frizzell?
To: Members of the CMKX Group April 14, 2005 (2nd )
It has been brought to my attention that the SEC is being spammed. I have been told that certain persons are sending multiple emails and some of the content contains threatening messages. Some of the email has been described as personally insulting to various SEC attorneys. I have told the SEC that this spam tactic and letter writing campaign was not endorsed nor ordered by me. You are advised that spamming is illegal. You could and may be prosecuted for such acts. Anyone that makes personal threats against another will have far more to worry about than their interest in CMKX. Such threats are a federal offense and you can believe the FBI and the Justice Department take such threats seriously, as they should.
I am hopeful that if these acts are in fact occurring, that those responsible are not members of the CMKX Owners Group. If they are, you are advised to cease and desist from such activity. We have a judicial process that is in place and working. This activity will only be counterproductive to the company. The Court will certainly not condone such activity.
The SEC receives letters from the public on a regular basis. Legitimate questions, inquiries and comments are expected in an agency that has such a significant place in our society. The acts referred to above go far beyond what is acceptable as an inquiry to the SEC. Sometimes the acts of a few can cause problems for the many. I am spending an increasing amount of my time trying to answer the questions of the members of our group. I will increase my staff if necessary to try and answer the questions you have, but any questions from members of this group should be directed to this office rather than the SEC. I am your lawyer and your questions will be answered.
I maintain my promise to you that you will be regularly informed of matters involving this proceeding through our email setup with this group. Please encourage other shareholders to act civil and lawfully in your efforts to support the company.
Bill Frizzell
Cc: Donald Stoecklein SEC Judge Brenda Murray
-------------------- Invest with your brain not with your heart.
IP: Logged |
Please stay out of the slop legal is trying to feed us and pull others into a fray with his constant attempts to start personal attacks as he and others did in the past.
Wallace, legal is a friend. You are too. Friends of a friend don't have to be friends although it would be great if you were. You have not seen me taking sides but I will not abandon a friend, neither legal nor you. You have never attacked legal in such a personal way as did the poster that referred to him as gimpy. That I cannot ignore. Goodnight my friend.
IP: Logged |
Because he couldn't. I don't think the original plan was to get this carried away. Bit now he's got what, 50,000+ shareholders all looking to get rich because of promises made by the company. It's a 700 billion share, 389 million dollar swindle. To try to just walk away would be impossible. You'd have 50,000 people screaming for your head and filing lawsuit after lawsuit. It has to be made to look legitimate. So, he gives out worthless dividends, puts up video of real, actual diamond drilling, and actually has the samples tested knowing full well there's nothing there. His downfall would have been an actual diamond discovery of any worth, that's the last thing he wants.
Yes, we have had this discussion before. Most everything on this board and all the others are nothing more than rehashes of old posts and theories. Heck, I'll keep throwing mine out since everyone else is doing the same.
IP: Logged |
Remember that neither myself nor Donald Stoecklein were involved when Urban was requested to give his deposition. The company had other counsel in addition to Roger Glenn. So neither of us have seen the depositions. He (DS) knows of UC's testimony. Will UC testify? That will be up to the DS and the company. Based on what I am hearing I do not expect that all required financials will be filed by Monday
-------------------- Invest with your brain not with your heart.
IP: Logged |
UBBFriend: Email this page to someone!
Printer-friendly view of this topic
