posted
Built upon Thirteen Techniques for Truth Suppression by David Martin, the following may be useful to the initiate in the world of dealing with veiled and half-truth, lies, and suppression of truth when serious crimes are studied in public forums. This, sadly, includes every day news media, one of the worst offenders with respect to being a source of disinformation. Where the crime involves a conspiracy, or a conspiracy to cover up the crime, there will invariably be a disinformation campaign launched against those seeking to uncover and expose the truth and/or the conspiracy. There are specific tactics which disinfo artists tend to apply, as revealed here. Also included with this material are seven common traits of the disinfo artist which may also prove useful in identifying players and motives. The more a particular party fits the traits and is guilty of following the rules, the more likely they are a professional disinfo artist with a vested motive. People can be bought, threatened, or blackmailed into providing disinformation, so even "good guys" can be suspect in many cases.
IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by legaleagle: Built upon Thirteen Techniques for Truth Suppression by David Martin, the following may be useful to the initiate in the world of dealing with veiled and half-truth, lies, and suppression of truth when serious crimes are studied in public forums. This, sadly, includes every day news media, one of the worst offenders with respect to being a source of disinformation. Where the crime involves a conspiracy, or a conspiracy to cover up the crime, there will invariably be a disinformation campaign launched against those seeking to uncover and expose the truth and/or the conspiracy. There are specific tactics which disinfo artists tend to apply, as revealed here. Also included with this material are seven common traits of the disinfo artist which may also prove useful in identifying players and motives. The more a particular party fits the traits and is guilty of following the rules, the more likely they are a professional disinfo artist with a vested motive. People can be bought, threatened, or blackmailed into providing disinformation, so even "good guys" can be suspect in many cases.
WTF all of this have to do with the stock market? Should have known better, this is CMKX thread....
IP: Logged |
posted
legal I believe we discussed this before. I hold 22M shares. Selling them at .00003 wouldnt even cover the charges for selling them. So, I'm stuck holding them. And just in case UC ever gets a class action suit, I can show them to the lawyer. You never know how these things work out. Wallace, thanks for the laugh. I think I have lead deposits in my back yard, wonder if UC would like to buy the mineral rights.....
-------------------- If I give you bad information, please feel free to sue me. I have nothing left anyway. Ed
IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by legaleagle: Built upon Thirteen Techniques for Truth Suppression by David Martin, the following may be useful to the initiate in the world of dealing with veiled and half-truth, lies, and suppression of truth when serious crimes are studied in public forums. This, sadly, includes every day news media, one of the worst offenders with respect to being a source of disinformation. Where the crime involves a conspiracy, or a conspiracy to cover up the crime, there will invariably be a disinformation campaign launched against those seeking to uncover and expose the truth and/or the conspiracy. There are specific tactics which disinfo artists tend to apply, as revealed here. Also included with this material are seven common traits of the disinfo artist which may also prove useful in identifying players and motives. The more a particular party fits the traits and is guilty of following the rules, the more likely they are a professional disinfo artist with a vested motive. People can be bought, threatened, or blackmailed into providing disinformation, so even "good guys" can be suspect in many cases.
quote:Originally posted by legaleagle: ed, have you sold your shares yet? If it is a scam and going down the tubes, why wouldn't you get out with a little money.?
posted
Built upon Thirteen Techniques for Truth Suppression by David Martin, the following may be useful to the initiate in the world of dealing with veiled and half-truth, lies, and suppression of truth when serious crimes are studied in public forums. This, sadly, includes every day news media, one of the worst offenders with respect to being a source of disinformation. Where the crime involves a conspiracy, or a conspiracy to cover up the crime, there will invariably be a disinformation campaign launched against those seeking to uncover and expose the truth and/or the conspiracy. There are specific tactics which disinfo artists tend to apply, as revealed here. Also included with this material are seven common traits of the disinfo artist which may also prove useful in identifying players and motives. The more a particular party fits the traits and is guilty of following the rules, the more likely they are a professional disinfo artist with a vested motive. People can be bought, threatened, or blackmailed into providing disinformation, so even "good guys" can be suspect in many cases.
===================================
if that aint the cult & paid pumpers & cmkx then i'm a hundred million share holdin, card carryin, kool aide drinkin cult member.....lol
-------------------- "keep your stick on the ice & your cup firmly in place"
IP: Logged |
posted
going after someones handicap or serious health problem in not ok osnap...questioning each other mental abilities or ability to except reality is a given on both sides of the fence. but IMO that pic is in bad taste & not ok.
-------------------- "keep your stick on the ice & your cup firmly in place"
IP: Logged |
posted
osnap, what are you about 18 or 19 years old? You seem to have a rather obscene fascination and preoccupation with my disability. Sorry, but I am not sensitive about it nor am I affected by your attempts to humiliate me about it. I draw great strength and satisfaction from being able to survive each day and continue to function somewhat normally. Actually I am more concerned about anyone thinking that I might in some way be "weaker" because of it, or feeling sorry for me. But if you would ever like to test that, please drag your cowardly little ass out from behind your pseudonym, and meet me man to man.
IP: Logged |
posted
So UCAD lied about its 2004 financials. Very interesting.
UNITED STATES SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION
Washington, D.C. 20549 -------------------------
FORM 8-K CURRENT REPORT
PURSUANT TO SECTION 13 OR 15(d) OF THE SECURITIES EXCHANGE ACT OF 1934
March 29,2005 (Date of earliest event reported)
U.S. CANADIAN MINERALS, INC. (Exact Name of Registrant as Specified in Charter)
Nevada 0-25523 33-0843633 (State or Other (Commission File No.) (IRS Employer Jurisdiction of Identification No.) Incorporation)
4955 S. Durango Suite 216, Las Vegas, Nevada 89113 (Address of Principal Executive Offices)
(702) 433-8223 (Registrants telephone number, including area code)
Not Applicable (Former Name or Former Address, if Changed Since Last Report)
Check the appropriate box below if the Form 8-K filing is intended to simultaneously satisfy the filing obligation of the registrant under any of the following provisions 38: (see General Instructions A.2. below)
Written communications pursuant to Rule 425 under the Securities Act (17 CFR 230.425)
Soliciting material pursuant to Rule 14a-12 under the Exchange Act (17 CFR 240.14a-12) Pre-commencement communications pursuant to Rule 14d-2(b) under the Exchange Act (17 CFR 240.14d-2(b)) Pre-commencement communications pursuant to Rule 13e-4(c) under the Exchange Act (17 CFR 240.13e-4(c))
Item 4.02 Non Reliance on Previously Issued Financial Statements or a Related Audit Report or Completed Interim Review
On March 29, 2005, the registrant concluded that its previously issued financial statements,(i)as of and for the nine months ended September 30, 2004, as filed in the registrant's Quarterly Report on Form 10-QSB on November 16, 2004,(ii)as of and for six months ended June 30, 2004, as filed in the registrants Quarterly Report on Form 10-QSB on August 23, 2004 and (iii) as of and for the three months ended March 31, 2004 as filed in the registrants Quarterly Report on Form 10-QSB on May 21, 2004, should no longer be relied upon because of an error in such financial statements. The error is in the methodology used to value the mineral rights acquired by the registrant, which resulted in the value of such mineral rights being overstated.
SIGNATURE
Pursuant to the requirements of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, the registrant has duly caused this report to be signed on its behalf by the undersigned hereunto duly authorized.
U.S. CANADIAN MINERALS, INC.
By: /s/ John Woodward Name: John Woodward Title: President
Date: March 30, 2005
- 3 -
-------------------- Invest with your brain not with your heart.
IP: Logged |
Also Street Wire (U-*SEC) U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission
by Lee M. Webb
CMKM Diamonds Inc.'s petition for review of Chief Administrative Law Judge Brenda P. Murray's July 12 initial decision to revoke the company's stock registration has been granted by the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC). Under the review briefing schedule, the appellate process could stretch into late October and beyond.
Following the Aug. 5 order granting the petition for review, the SEC enforcement division filed a motion for summary affirmation of Judge Murray's initial decision.
Among other things, the SEC's Aug. 8 motion claims that prompt revocation "is urgently needed to protect the investing public from a publicly registered company that continues to operate in shadows and in secret."
The order
As previously reported by Stockwatch, CMKM's lawyer Donald Stoecklein filed a three-page petition for review of Judge Murray's decision on July 29.
In his petition, the lawyer for Urban Casavant's massively diluted subpenny pink sheet promotion raised objections to four allegedly erroneous conclusions of law and took exception to six findings of fact and the conclusions drawn from them in Judge Murray's initial decision.
While it was far from clear, at least from a lay perspective, that Mr. Stoecklein's petition provided "a reasonable showing" of prejudicial error in the proceedings or that Judge Murray's decision embodied erroneous findings and conclusions of material fact or reviewable exercises of discretion, the SEC issued an order granting the petition for review on Aug. 5.
According to the briefing schedule in the Aug. 5 order, CMKM has until Sept. 6 to file a brief in support of the petition for review. The SEC enforcement division, represented by Leslie Hakala and Gregory Glynn, then has until Oct. 6 to file an opposition brief. Rounding out the briefing schedule, CMKM can file a reply brief by Oct. 20.
It remains to be seen whether that briefing schedule stretching the appeal process at least into late October will be followed, given that the SEC filed a motion for summary affirmation of Judge Murray's initial decision on Aug. 8.
The motion
According to the SEC, no issue raised in Judge Murray's initial decision warrants consideration of further oral or written arguments.
Ms. Hakala claims that CMKM "has egregiously and repeatedly" violated its reporting obligations by failing to file quarterly and annual reports since 2002 and those violations "are virtually certain to continue" because the company has no independent auditor, no financial statements to audit and cannot even estimate when it will be able to file periodic reports.
"In its Petition for Review filed on July 29, 2005, CMKM Diamonds offers no reasonable showing of prejudicial error committed in this proceeding," Ms. Hakala claims. "Accordingly, summary affirmance is appropriate in this matter."
In a footnote, the SEC lawyer says that apart from reciting the language of the relevant rule in its petition, "CMKM Diamonds does not suggest that this matter involves any exercises of discretion or important policy or legal decisions requiring the Commission's review."
"The Division agrees that this case does not raise any meaningful exercises of discretion or any novel or important policy or legal issues," Ms. Hakala remarks.
According to Ms. Hakala, summary affirmation of Judge Murray's initial decision is warranted for another reason.
"For almost three years, CMKM Diamonds has illegally denied its shareholders and the investing public accurate and complete information about its finances and activities," the SEC lawyer claims. "During this period, trading volume of CMKM Diamonds' stock has regularly exceeded one billion shares per day.
"Unless the Commission summarily affirms the Initial Decision, this harm to the investing public is likely to continue during a protracted appellate process.
"Prompt revocation of CMKM Diamonds' stock is urgently needed to protect the investing public from a publicly registered company that continues to operate in shadows and in secret."
In her argument, Ms. Hakala points out that eight of CMKM's 10 objections to the initial decision "relate only to Judge Murray's findings and conclusions regarding the false Form 15 filed in July 2003."
"Specifically, CMKM Diamonds disputes Judge Murray's evidentiary findings regarding the circumstances under which the false Form 15 was filed (in particular, that it was filed in bad faith), and her conclusions in law regarding the effect of that false filing," Ms. Hakala writes. "As detailed in the lengthy Initial Decision, however, the evidence developed in this proceeding fully supports Judge Murray's findings and conclusions regarding the false Form 15.
"Indeed, the Division notes that CMKM Diamonds itself offered no evidence whatsoever regarding the false Form 15.
"As Judge Murray wrote, 'The public hearing was an opportunity for CMKM Diamonds to address the allegations in the OIP. It failed to do so. Casavant seems to be the only person running the company and he refused to testify.'"
Ms. Hakala goes on to argue that even if the judge erred regarding the Form 15, "such error would be neither prejudicial nor material."
Indeed, the SEC lawyer writes, Judge Murray took that possibility into account in her decision, noting that even accepting CMKM's arguments regarding the Form 15, the company was required to file all missing periodic reports by April 18 and still had not filed the required reports by the date of the initial decision.
"In other words, regardless of the factual findings and legal conclusions relating to the Form 15, CMKM Diamonds remains in violation of the federal securities laws, and the registration of its securities should therefore be revoked," Ms. Hakala says. "Thus, CMKM Diamonds' eight purported objections relating to the Form 15 make no difference to the outcome of this case and do not support a reasonable showing of prejudicial error."
According to Ms. Hakala, CMKM's other two objections "merely assert without explanation" that CMKM has not violated securities laws with respect to reporting obligations.
"These bald assertions are without evidentiary support," the SEC lawyer writes.
Ms. Hakala points out that CMKM admits that its stock is registered, that it is obligated to file periodic reports and that it has failed to file any reports since 2002.
"CMKM Diamonds' unsupported objections to the contrary, the company has not made a reasonable showing that Judge Murray erred in concluding that CMKM Diamonds has violated -- and continues to violate -- the reporting provisions of the federal securities laws," Ms. Hakala argues. "Therefore, summary affirmation of the Initial Decision is appropriate."
Ms. Hakala goes on to argue that the public interest is best served by summarily affirming the initial decision in order to promptly revoke CMKM's stock registration.
"Although CMKM Diamonds has not devoted any meaningful effort towards preparing auditable financial statements in the past three years, it has purportedly engaged in numerous multi-million dollar transactions," Ms. Hakala writes. "For example, the company allegedly received $3-million from U.S. Canadian Minerals Inc. and $10-million from St. George Metals Inc. in exchange for mineral claims in 2004.
"Unfortunately, the company seems to have no idea where that money went, and shareholders have no way of finding out."
Interestingly, while Ms. Hakala posed some questions during the May 10 evidentiary hearing regarding the $3-million purportedly received from U.S. Canadian Minerals and referred to that same amount in briefs, the company reportedly anted up far more than that for a stake in CMKM. (All amounts are in U.S. dollars.)
Indeed, according to SEC filings by U.S. Canadian Minerals, the Nevada-based company poured $13.5-million into CMKM. According to U.S. Canadian Minerals, Mr. Casavant and four members of his family provided the cash that was subsequently funnelled into CMKM.
U.S. Canadian Minerals is under investigation by the SEC, as is St. George Metals, and the company is badly delinquent with its annual report for 2004. On March 30, moreover, U.S. Canadian Minerals filed an 8-K disclosing that its three quarterly reports for 2004 should no longer be relied upon.
"Likewise, it appears that CMKM Diamonds may have issued over $24.6-million worth of stock in 2003, but the company's bookkeeper does not know why," Ms. Hakala continues. "And, the company may have acquired $56-million in jade, but cannot definitively explain what happened to that purported asset.
"By failing to file required reports, CMKM Diamonds has been able to operate in shadows and in secret, relieved of the obligation to keep its shareholders, regulators and the investing public apprised of its actual activities or lack thereof.
"Indeed, after this proceeding was instituted in March 2005, CMKM Diamonds itself publicly acknowledged "its inability to provide accurate information about its financial condition.
"As Judge Murray wrote, 'the investing public has received only self-serving statements from persons promoting CMKM Diamonds.'"
Ms. Hakala goes on to remark that despite the lack of reliable information, "CMKM Diamonds' stock trades at exceptionally high volumes."
In fact, CMKM has traded at even higher volumes than perhaps realized by the SEC, which relied on flawed data provided by Bloomberg.
As previously reported by Stockwatch, CMKM has traded such massive volumes that many quote services, evidently including Bloomberg, have not been able to accurately report the daily totals.
In simple terms, the volume counters used by many quote services "turn over" much like a vehicle odometer once they hit a certain point.
In more technical terms, most software uses a 32-bit signed integer to represent volumes, therefore the maximum possible value is 2,147,483,647.
CMKM regularly traded more than 2.15 billion shares per day, topped 10 billion shares on many occasions and once notched an astounding 39.6 billion shares. Those whopping volumes were not accurately reported in the Bloomberg data relied upon by the SEC.
In any event, even the under-reported trading volumes are evidently high enough to cause the SEC some concern.
"Under these circumstances and given that CMKM Diamonds has made no reasonable showing of prejudicial error, summary affirmance of the Initial Decision is appropriate to ensure the prompt protection of the investing public," Ms. Hakala writes.
"As things now stand, the public lacks access to complete and reliable information about CMKM Diamonds, including its financial status, business activities or stock issuances," the SEC lawyer continues. "Thus, the public cannot make informed investment decisions.
"This lack of information is certain to continue, given that CMKM Diamonds has made little progress towards preparing its financial statements, that the company's outside auditor has resigned and that the company is unable to estimate when it will file reports."
Coming to the end of her 10-page motion, Ms. Hakala takes a swipe at CMKM's July 29 petition for review.
"Most recently, CMKM Diamonds has filed a virtually frivolous Petition for Review, likely in hopes that full review by the Commission of this matter will allow it even more time to conduct its activities without public scrutiny or disclosure," the SEC lawyer writes.
"Since 2002, CMKM Diamonds has utterly deprived the investing public of 'the primary tool which Congress has fashioned for the protection of investors from negligent, careless, and deliberate misrepresentations,'" Ms. Hakala continues. "To promptly stop such misconduct and the resultant harm to investors, the Commission should summarily affirm the Initial Decision."
Under SEC rules, CMKM has five days from the date of service to file an opposition brief to Ms. Hakala's motion for summary affirmation of Judge Murray's initial decision. Assuming CMKM files an opposition brief, the SEC will have three days to file a reply brief.
The saga continues.
-------------------- Invest with your brain not with your heart.
IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by legaleagle: osnap, what are you about 18 or 19 years old? You seem to have a rather obscene fascination and preoccupation with my disability. Sorry, but I am not sensitive about it nor am I affected by your attempts to humiliate me about it. I draw great strength and satisfaction from being able to survive each day and continue to function somewhat normally. Actually I am more concerned about anyone thinking that I might in some way be "weaker" because of it, or feeling sorry for me. But if you would ever like to test that, please drag your cowardly little ass out from behind your pseudonym, and meet me man to man.
Imbecille it has nothing to do with your handicap, like the clown in the picture he is about to get killed but is laughing away like a moron. Likewise nothing you post makes a lick of sense but yet you post away like all is well meanwhile the stock is about to be revoked. I posted tons of questions on the stock and as usual your stupid ass ignores them and posts nonsense from god knows where.
IP: Logged |
Member Info Status: offline Joined: Aug 2004 Gender: Male Posts: 863 Location: Cajun' Country...Louisiana Karma: 4
Contact Icons
Interesting read.... « Thread Started on Yesterday at 4:51pm »
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Here is a letter found on the net that was submitted in an attempt to support CMKX.
It was not written by me, but it gives me a sense of well being that I'm not insane....
"...................
Below is a copy of a letter written to the Honorable Judge Brenda P. Murray. I feel that in the reading of this letter that you will get a better estimation of the gravidity of the situation, than if I were to try to spell out everything from the beginning..
However, for clarification here is brief introduction. The letter is written to the Honorable Judge Brenda P. Murray in response to action that has been taking by the SEC against a new small diamond mining company based in Las Vegas called CMKM Diamonds Inc. (CMKX). 56,000 shareholders have invested money, into this stock, that they cannot afford to loose. It is estimated that the shares would be worth in excess of one dollar per share today, if this dilution caused by the counterfeiting of shares had not occurred.
Instead of our government's Security Exchange Commission protecting the existing shareholders as they are required to do by governing laws. They are trying to delist the company from being able to trade shares on the market. If this happens, the end result will be that the shares held by shareholders will become worthless. Section one article eight of the Constitution, requires Congress to punish those who counterfeit money or securities.
In trying to battle this situation, and in order to raise the working capital that was needed. The company had to issue billions of shares. This counterfieting of shares is hurting the company, shareholders and the stock market, and our government appears to be taken the side of those who are doing this crime.
Here is that letter..
The Honorable Brenda P. Murray Chief Administrative Law Judge 450 5th Street, N.W. Mail Stop 1106 Washington, D.C. 20549-1106
Your Honor:
This letter is written in the hopes that the information I provide will help in your decision regarding CMKM Diamonds. I have been a shareholder in this company for over 18 months only after doing extensive due dilligence. My partners and I have gone to great lengths spending hundreds of dollars and manhours in order to follow the paper trails associated with the claims held by CMKX. I have researched miles of paper in documents, laws, contracts, deeds and have come to one conclusion, CMKX is a viable company.
I have watched CMKX trade shares in the billions on a daily basis. I have seen the company raise their authorized shares to a staggering 800 billion shares. I have watched the company state that the outstanding shares is 703,518,875,000. Many things on the surface seemed out of the ordinary until further researched. The definitive 14c filed by CMKX in Feb 2003 states some interesting things. I hope you have reviewed it for what it truly is, a contract. In that contract there are a group of people listed as "the sellers". These people hold not more than 4.9% of CMKX individually and a total of 85.8% of CMKX collectively. What I find interesting is that these shares are deemed "unaccessable" according to the contract until registered with the SEC. That means to me that 85.8% or 603,619,194,750 of this companies 703,518,875,000 shares cannot even trade, that leaves 99,899,680,250. I'm sure it has struck you as strange that the DTCC claims to have 404 billion shares under CEDE and Co. control. Another thing I find a little strange, which has probably piqued your interest as well, is that under contract, Mr. Casavant cannot divulge this information unless he is court ordered to do so. I'm sure you figured that out when he pleaded the fifth amendment in your court.
I also find it interesting that Ameritrade has halted the ability for its clients to buy CMKX as a corporate decision due to this investigation. Were you aware that Ameritrade holds 7.9 % of Knight Trading Group? If you knew that, I'm sure you knew that Knight Trading group stated in Feb 2004 they traded 3.6 billion CMKX shares a day, which accounted for 44% of their average trading volume. 19 trading days in Feb 2004 at 3.6 billion shares is a total of 68,480,000,000 shares At that time the o/s was 100 billion. Thats a whole lot more than 4.2%. Wouldn't you agree?
CMKX is now in court facing the SEC who is adamant about deregistration of its securities; and in their first response after the hearing, the SEC has called the form 15 filed by CMKX fraudulant. I'm sure you are thinking "why would the SEC wait 2 years to enforce this?" Well, me too. According to Reg 12g, if a company has less than 300 shareholders of record or more than 300 but less than 500 shareholders of record and less that 10 million dollars in assetts on the last day of the 3 most recent fiscal years, the company then may file for deregistration under the rule by filing a form 15. OK, in court it was stated that 360 people became shareholders of record in Feb of 2003, and it was also stated that there were 692 shareholders of record in July 2003. How many were there on Dec 31, 2002, 2001, and 2000 respectively. Those numbers and those dates are the ones that matter according to the SEC regulation 12g. I also ask, if CMKX was wrong in filing their form 15, are they not also covered under the exemption 13a-13 which states, and I quote:
" Part I of the quarterly reports on Form 10-Q or Form 10-QSB need not be filed by:
1. Mutual life insurance companies; or
2. Mining companies not in the production stage but engaged primarily in the exploration for the development of mineral deposits other than oil, gas or coal, if all the following conditions are met:
1. The registrant has not been in production during the current fiscal year or the two years immediately prior thereto; except that being in production for an aggregate period of not more than eight months over the three-year period shall not be a violation of this condition.
2. Receipts from the sale of mineral products or from the operations of mineral producing properties by the registrant and its subsidiaries combined have not exceeded $500,000 in any of the most recent six years and have not aggregated more than $1,500,000 in the most recent six fiscal years."
We know that part one of a 10q or 10qsb is all financials and management discussions about the standing of the company. Anything further in a 10q is considered "other information" such as legal proceedings and sales of unregistered securities. Is cmkx exempt from filing quarterly reports under rule 12g or rule 13a-13 as the rules that govern the 10q also state that all statements not covered by section 1 of a 10q may be filed in 8k and not refrenced in a 10q?
I have a problem with this situation as we have multiple regulations written by the SEC that have been violated by the SEC, AS FOLLOWS:
1. Under Reg 12g the company filed a form 15 (which must be reviewed and signed off by the SEC for accuarcy to deregister)
2. The SEC has not addressed the shareholders of record or the assets in question according to Reg 12g (the last day of the 3 most recent fiscal years)
3. When CMKX filed a 15/a in order to regain reporting status, the SEC reacted with legal proceedings 31 days prematurely. According to rule 12g the company was to recieve 60 days to catch up on past filings. Instead the company had to prepare for legal proceedings in your court.
4. The SEC is basing their case around CMKX and its financials being presented, or lack there of, but according to their own Regulation 13a-13 since CMKX is a mining company in "exploration stages" the companies financials are not even required to be filed.
All of this leads me to believe that someone does not want this company to continue and its not because of the filings or any attempt to "defraud" investors. The very same SEC that is bringing these charges wrote the regulations. How can the SEC offer Revocation as the only remedy in this situation when they themselves were recently 6 months late in their own filings? Filings which were rejected by the GAO due to internal accounting practices that were not SOX compliant.
I ask you, who has the most to gain or lose by your decision? Common shareholders that bought a piece of CMKX because they did research on the claims this company holds and the Laws and regulations that govern its trading, or the SEC who is supposed to police the markets and has allowed billions if not trillions of unaccessable and counterfeit shares to trade unchecked on the market for over 2 years possibly allowing the funneling of billions of dollars out of the United States?
I feel I would be remiss if I didn't ask you to review the regulations that the SEC has ignored in bringing this action against CMKX.
Thank you for your time, Your Honor, I'm sure that this information will find the truth with you and the others it is sent to.
quote:Originally posted by Wallace#1: Be careful, ed, or the faithful will have CMKX discovering vaulable lead deposits.
Oh, disregard my last. Those lead deposits in my back yard turned out to be the remains of an old firing range. However, I did locate enough spent lead to make a couple fishing sinkers. And here I was all ready to form a company and sell stock.....things never seem to work out the way you plan them.
-------------------- If I give you bad information, please feel free to sue me. I have nothing left anyway. Ed
IP: Logged |
56,000 shareholders have invested money, into this stock, that they cannot afford to loose. It is estimated that the shares would be worth in excess of one dollar per share today, if this dilution caused by the counterfeiting of shares had not occurred.
So by posting this are you agreeing that CMKX should have a share price just north of $1? An $800 billion dollar market cap?
Also, the letter says 'billions' of dollars have been funneled out of the US? Do you agree with this statement?
IP: Logged |
posted
I sure as hell hope there is a summary affirmation. It would be a shame to keep CMKX barely alive for about another month with any kind of review. Enough of their BS, taking the 5th, lack of proper records, insider dealings, conflicts of interest, etc.
legal,
Go back and tell WorkAHolic that I said he is full of crap as usual. I sure do hope he is sorry for buying into CMKX, but I well remember his attitude from the past....ignorant. Lots of credibility....just like yours.
IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Wallace#1: I sure as hell hope there is a summary affirmation. It would be a shame to keep CMKX barely alive for about another month with any kind of review. Enough of their BS, taking the 5th, lack of proper records, insider dealings, conflicts of interest, etc.
legal,
Go back and tell WorkAHolic that I said he is full of crap as usual. I sure do hope he is sorry for buying into CMKX, but I well remember his attitude from the past....ignorant. Lots of credibility....just like yours.
OFF WITH THEIR HEADS. OFF WITH THEIR HEADS. LOL WALLACE
IP: Logged |
posted
Anyone have UCAD divy's may want to read this. I sure hope you got a ton of it because it will cost a ton to lift the restriction when it expires. But wasn't it nice to recieve them anyway, lol.
~fishing4diamonds~ Administrator
member is offline
Joined: Aug 2004 Gender: Male Posts: 7,319 Location: ON DA BOAT Ameriturds response on restricted shares « Thread Started on Today at 12:28pm »
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------- I sent Ameriturd an email asking how I need to handle the UCAD divies that are restricted (as they are lifting shortly) so that I can trade them. Here is what I got back.
_______________________________________
Dear xxxxxxxxx:
Thank you for contacting us today concerning your account.
The shares in your account that are designated as "Restricted" are shares that you received as a spin-off or distribution from one of the companies you were holding in your account on the designated distribution date. The shares may have value once the restriction has expired or can be lifted, but are not negotiable at this time according to the company. Typically, some type of SEC restriction, such as Rule 144, restricts these shares. At this time, Ameritrade has not received official information indicating the nature of the restriction, or it's expiration date. Please inquire with the issuer as to the nature of the restriction and/or it's expiration date. Below are the restricted stock handling guidelines for negotiating shares at Ameritrade.
Additionally, if you would like to remove the position without clearing the restriction, you may request to transfer the shares to another brokerage, request a stock certificate, or request to remove the position as non-marketable. Please be aware that not all options may be available, and additional fees will apply.
According to Security and Exchange Commission regulations, restricted securities are not negotiable without the required documentation. Since Rule 144 is one of the more common restrictions, we have provided information on the document requirements and the Rule 144 procedures below. However, if your securities are restricted under another rule, please contact the Ameritrade Safekeeping Department.
Legal Opinion *This document can be obtained by contacting the issuing company.
Note: In regards to the information above, you will find a link to the forms on our Web site. You can also go to www.ameritrade.com/forms.html. Once at this page, select "Stock certificate transfers" option in the drop down box. Please mail completed form with original signature to Ameritrade to begin processing.
Important information: Please retain for future reference.
- Restricted stock requires legal items and special handling, and will be subject to a $250 restricted security processing fee per submission to the transfer agent.
Please note: you may be subject to multiple restricted security processing fees.
- Ameritrade requires you to deposit your restricted stock into an account with margin privileges. Please complete a Margin/Option Account Upgrade Form if you do not currently hold a margin account.
- Ameritrade requires you to hold at least $2,000 in equity in your account in addition to your deposit of restricted stock.
- Ameritrade must receive your stock certificate, completed Rule 144 Client Pledge, completed Rule 144 Client Statement, and completed SEC Form 144 before your sale is initiated.
- Ameritrade must receive a legal opinion prior to sending the shares to the transfer agent for processing.
- The total processing time normally ranges from four to six weeks.
- Ameritrade will file the required forms on your behalf.
- You will have approximately ninety (90) days from the date stated on the SEC Form 144 to liquidate your shares. After ninety (90) days the certificate will be subject to delivery of any shares sold, which can include a break down of the shares. Shares not sold may be sent back to you or held for continued processing. Additional restricted security processing fees may be assessed at this time.
- If you wish to extend the trading period for an additional ninety (90) days, a new SEC Form 144 and a Stock Power will be required. Additional fees may apply.
- Your transactions may also be subject to additional fees:
- Extension fees of $25 per executed order may apply if any of the stock is sold before processing is completed. These charges will occur every ten (10)-business days per executed order until shares have cleared.
- Fees charged to Ameritrade ("Pass Through" fees) may also be assessed to your account. These fees may vary in amount.
-Proceeds from sale transactions are not available for withdrawal or trading purposes until processing has been completed, funds are cleared and shares are delivered. Your account is subject to repurchase of shares if they are sold prior to completion of any required processing.
If you have further concerns or inquiries, please reply to this message.
Sincerely,
Joy Busse Reorganization and Safekeeping, Ameritrade Division of Ameritrade, Inc.
-------------------- Invest with your brain not with your heart.
IP: Logged |
posted
ed are you crazy??? you found at leasat a billion times more lead the cmkx has diamonds...start printing shares & follow the master plan. you of course may end up in jail for a while but then UC doesn't seem to mind his possible future.
-------------------- "keep your stick on the ice & your cup firmly in place"
IP: Logged |
posted
i posted that $250 charge when the divys came out Ric. USCA & GEMM both are worthless unless the company pays to costs of removing the restrictions. it is possible that there will be no cost to shareholders but i wouldn't hold your breath.
-------------------- "keep your stick on the ice & your cup firmly in place"
IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by bill1352: ed are you crazy??? you found at leasat a billion times more lead the cmkx has diamonds...start printing shares & follow the master plan. you of course may end up in jail for a while but then UC doesn't seem to mind his possible future.
Yeah, but I REALLY needed sinkers....been losing a lot of them on the Chesapeake rocks. I'll keep digging and come up with a Senior Master Plam.....
-------------------- If I give you bad information, please feel free to sue me. I have nothing left anyway. Ed
IP: Logged |
posted
Guess I'll have to ask Ameriturd what is the cheapest way out of this morass..... Might end up with a little USCA profit, but GEMM is a lost cause.
-------------------- If I give you bad information, please feel free to sue me. I have nothing left anyway. Ed
IP: Logged |
Topic Closed
UBBFriend: Email this page to someone!
Printer-friendly view of this topic
