Source: http://cmkxunitedforum.proboards.com/thread/14038?page=1
Timestamp: 2014-12-21 01:03:25
Document Index: 78667972

Matched Legal Cases: ['§ 77', '§ 78', '§ 77', '§ 78', '§ 77', '§ 78', '§ 78', '§ 77', '§ 78', '§ 77', '§ 78', '§ 77', '§ 78']

Hotdog...SEC vs Marco Glisson~ Delidog | CMKX United Shareholders Board CMKX United Shareholders Board Skip Navigation
CMKX United Shareholders Board General DiscussionHotdog...SEC vs Marco Glisson~ Delidog
Hotdog...SEC vs Marco Glisson~ Delidog
Groucho Marx ?Who are you going to believe ? me or your eyes?? Posts: 303
Jan 15, 2009 19:50:24 GMT -4
Post by rics1997 on Jan 15, 2009 19:50:24 GMT -4
SEC v MARCO GLISSON Marco Glisson aka Delidog www.sec.gov/litigation/litreleases/2009/lr20855.htm U.S. SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION Litigation Release No. 20855 / January 15, 2009 Securities and Exchange Commission v. Marco Glisson, Civil Action No. 2:09-cv-00104 SEC CHARGES LAS VEGAS MAN WITH MAKING A MARKET IN DEREGISTERED SECURITIES The Securities and Exchange Commission ("Commission") announced today that it filed a civil injunctive action in the United States District Court of Nevada against Marco Glisson, a resident of Las Vegas, Nev., alleging that he illegally sold deregistered securities of CMKM Diamonds, Inc. On Oct. 28, 2005, CMKM's registration with the Commission was revoked. From December 2005 through April 2007, Glisson allegedly acted as an unregistered broker-dealer by purchasing and selling deregistered CMKM securities. Through this unlawful conduct, Glisson realized gross proceeds of at least $2 million. According to the complaint, Glisson, a former auto worker and restaurant employee, identified potential buyers and sellers by frequenting CMKM related internet chat rooms and through referrals from past buyers and sellers. Glisson then negotiated the terms of the transaction and consummated it by exchanging money for the pertinent CMKM stock certificate. Through these practices, Glisson made a market in deregistered CMKM securities at a time when legitimate broker-dealers refused to execute such purchases or sales because of the Commission's deregistration of CMKM. The Commission's complaint alleges that Glisson violated Sections 5(a) and 5(c) of the Securities Act and Section 15(a) of the Securities & Exchange Act. The Commission seeks a permanent injunction against Glisson prohibiting him from future violations of the relevant federal securities laws, disgorgement with prejudgment interest, civil penalties and an order prohibiting Glisson from participating in the offering of any penny stock. SEC Complaint in this matter www.sec.gov/litigation/complaints/2009/comp20855.pdf rics1997
Jan 15, 2009 19:50:52 GMT -4
Post by rics1997 on Jan 15, 2009 19:50:52 GMT -4
Last Edit: Jan 15, 2009 19:58:55 GMT -4 by rics1997
Jan 15, 2009 20:12:53 GMT -4
Post by portrush on Jan 15, 2009 20:12:53 GMT -4
Well, the others you mentioned weren't engaged in the same practice were they? No. So to try and make the leap is kinda stretching it a bit, imo.pr rics1997
Jan 15, 2009 20:24:59 GMT -4
Post by rics1997 on Jan 15, 2009 20:24:59 GMT -4
Last Edit: Jan 15, 2009 20:30:19 GMT -4 by rics1997
http://Gary Weiss is done!.com/
Jan 16, 2009 2:35:55 GMT -4
Post by gurumaster on Jan 16, 2009 2:35:55 GMT -4
MOLLY M. WHITE, Cal. Bar No. 171448E-mail: whitem@sec.govPARIS A. WYNN, Cal. Bar No. 224428E-mail: wynnp@sec.govAttorneys for PlaintiffSecurities and Exchange CommissionRosalind R. Tyson, Regional DirectorMichele Wein Layne, Associate Regional DirectorJohn M. McCoy III, Regional Trial Counsel5670 Wilshire Boulevard, 11th FloorLos Angeles, California 90036Telephone: (323) 965-3998Facsimile: (323) 965-3908UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURTDISTRICT OF NEVADACase No.COMPLAINTSECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION,Plaintiff,vs.MARCO GLISSON,Defendant.JURISDICTION AND VENUE1. This Court has jurisdiction over this action pursuant to Sections 20(b), 20(d)(1) and 22(a) of the Securities Act of 1933 ("Securities Act), 15 U.S.C. §§ 77t(b), 77t(d)(1) & 77v(a) and Sections 2l(d)(1), 2l(d)(3)(A), 2l(e) and 27 of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 ("Exchange Act"), 15 U.S.C. §§ 78u(d)(1), 78u(d)(3)(A), 78u(e) & 78aa. Defendant has, directly or indirectly, made use of the means or instrumentalities of interstate commerce, of the mails, or of thefacilities of a national securities exchange in connection with the transactions, acts, practices, and courses of business alleged in this Complaint.2. Venue is proper in this district pursuant to Section 22(a) of theSecurities Act, 15 U.S.C. § 77v(a), and Section 27 of the Exchange Act, 15 U.S.C. § 78aa, because certain of the transactions, acts, practices, and courses of conduct constituting violations of the federal securities laws occurred within this district.DEFENDANT3. Defendant Marco Glisson, age 53, resides in Las Vegas, Nevada. Until August 2006, Glisson was employed as an automobile worker, and worked at a restaurant called "the Deli Dog House" in Janesvile, Wisconsin, where he lived before moving to Las Vegas. Glisson has never been, and has never applied with the Securities and Commission ("Commission") to be, a registered securities broker or dealer. Glisson has never been associated with any registered broker or dealer.SUMMARY4. Between December 2005 and April 2007, Glisson repeatedly violatedthe federal securities laws by acting as an unregistered broker-dealer and engaging in hundreds of purchases and sales of the deregistered securities of CMKM Diamonds, Inc. ("CMKM") with individuals throughout the United States and Canada. CMKM's registration with the Commission ("Commission") had been revoked on October 28,2005. Essentially, Glisson "made a market" in unregistered CMKM securities. Glisson profited from these unlawful transactionsby selling the deregistered CMKM securities at substantially higher prices than he paid for them. Glisson made gross proceeds of approximately $2 million as result of his illicit transactions.5. Glisson identified potential buyers and sellers of deregistered CMKM securities by frequenting a number of internet chat rooms devoted to discussions regarding CMKM and held himself out as a broker and dealer of CMKM stock. Additionally, Glisson attracted buyers and sellers through referrals from past customers. After receiving inquiries from interested buyers and sellers, Glissoncontacted them and negotiated the terms of a purchase or sale. In most instances, Glisson made and received payments in connection with his purchases and sales via wire transfers to and from a number of bank accounts he controlled.6. Commission seeks a permanent injunction against Glisson prohibiting him from future violations of the federal securities laws, as well as an order requiring the payment of disgorgement with prejudgment interest and civil penalties and an order prohibiting Glisson from participating in the offering of any penny stock.GLISSON'S SCHEME7. In early 2005, the Commission instituted an administrative proceeding against CMKM, which ultimately resulted in the revocation of the registration of CMKM's stock on October 28,2005.8. In the wake of the deregistration ofCMKM's securities, and at a time when registered broker-dealers refused to execute trades in the newly deregistered stock, Glisson set himself up as a dealer, and to a lesser extent, a broker, of CMKM stock. Glisson had never been, or applied to be, registered with the Commission as a broker or dealer. Despite this, in December 2005, Glisson entered the business of purchasing and selling deregistered CMKM securities.9. To effectuate his unlawful transactions, Glisson contacted 1st Global Stock Transfer LLC ("1st Global"), the firm that had served as CMKM's transfer agent. Glisson asked 1st Global's owner if 1st Global was still willing to perform transfer agent services with respect to CMKM stock. 1st Global agreed to act as the transfer agent and confirm the validity of the CMKM stock certificates that Glisson purchased, and then cancel and reissue the certificates in accordance with Glisson's instructions. Between December 2005 and April 2007, 1st Global repeatedly canceled CMKM stock certificates and then reissued them in Glisson's name, or in the names of new purchasers as identified by Glisson.10. Glisson frequented a number of intemet chat rooms in which currentand prospective CMKM shareholders exchanged information and propagatedrumors regarding CMKM. The chat rooms provided Glisson with a pool ofindividuals in which to solicit purchases and sales of CMKM stock. Under the screen name "Deli dog" or "Deli," Glisson entered the chat rooms and posted messages indicating that he was willing to purchase and sell CMKM stock and provided contact information for interested parties. As a result, prospective purchasers and sellers used chat room discussions, email messages and telephone calls to contact Glisson. Glisson also identified prospective purchasers and sellersthrough referrals from individuals with whom he engaged in transactions involving CMKM stock.11. Glisson negotiated the purchase price after being contacted by a seller. Typically, Glisson tried to pay $0.0001 per share for CMKM stock, but he sometimes paid as much as $0.0005 per share. When contacted by prospective purchasers, Glisson provided a standard response, including (1) his contact information; (2) payment instructions, consisting of directions as to how to wire funds to Glisson's bank or credit union account, or to the account of a nominee that Glisson controlled; and (3) the following price schedule for CMKM stock, indicating that he generally sold CMKM shares for between $0.0003 and $0.00025 per share depending on volume:SHARES + CERT FEE = $$$$1M = 300.00 + 50.00 = 350.002M = 500.00 + 50.00 = 550.005M = 1250.00 + 50.00 = 1,300.0010M = 2500.00 + 50.00 = 2,550.0050M = 12,500.00 + 50.00 = 12,550.00100M = 25,000.00 + 50.00 = 25,050.0012. Glisson did not always adhere to the price schedule. At times, he sold at prices both higher and lower than those set forth in the schedule.13. During the relevant time period, Glisson purchased and then soldbillions of shares of deregistered CMKM securities. Because Glisson sold the securities for less than one cent per share, he sold in large volumes to make a profit. To supply these large sales, he purchased massive amounts of CMKM stock from individuals throughout the United States and Canada.14. For example, from December 2005 to May 2006, Glisson spentapproximately $793,825 to make 34 purchases of CMKM securities fromapproximately 8 different individuals in the United States and Canada, whom he had identified as having large holdings of CMKM securities. Glisson executed the purchases by wiring the agreed-upon funds from his account(s) to the bank account of the seller, who then sent the stock certificates to Glisson. Upon receipt of thecertificates, Glisson forwarded the certificates to 1st Global, along with instructions to cancel and re-issue them in his name and/or in the names of individuals to whom he had sold CMKM stock.15. Between December 2005 and May 2006, Glisson sold CMKM stock in at least 100 transactions with at least 65 individuals throughout the United States and Canada. Through these sales, Glisson obtained gross proceeds of more than $850,000. For the period from June 2006 to April 2007, Glisson grossed at least an additional $925,000 from his unlawful sales of CMKM stock.16. Glisson acted as a dealer of CMKM securities by purchasing andselling them for his own account. He profited by selling the securities at higher prices than he paid for them. On occasion, Glisson also acted as a broker of CMKM securities by purchasing and selling CMKM securities for the accounts of others. In these instances, he profited by realizing the equivalent of sales commissions. In order to broker transactions, Glisson located a party interested in selling and a party interested in buying CMKM securities. Glisson then contacted the seller and determined the price at which she was wiling to sell her shares. Next, Glisson contacted the buyer and negotiated a purchase price higher than theprice at which the seller was wiling to sell.17. For example, in December 2005, Glisson brokered a transaction for an individual who wanted to sell 185 million shares of CMKM for $72,000. Glisson identified a buyer wiling to purchase these shares for $75,000. Glisson received $75,000 from the purchaser, then tendered $72,000 to the sellers, kept $3,000 for himself, and directed 1st Global to cancel and re-issue the stock certificate in the name of the new purchaser.18. In June 2006, after the Commission had contacted him, Glissoninformed the Commission staff that his activities would cease immediately. After suspending his activities for approximately three months, Glisson resumed his purchases and sales in September 2006, and commented in internet chat rooms that he would not cease buying and selling CMKM securities unless ordered to do so by a court.19. Glisson took steps to avoid detection after resuming his buying and selling. Specifically, Glisson began using a different bank to send and receive money on CMKM transactions. Next, Glisson stopped using his own accounts altogether, and started utilizing the accounts of his new wife in connection with his buying and selling activities. Finally, Glisson stopped using wire transfers in connection with his purchases and sales, and instead, began to make and receive payments exclusively through the mails.20. In April 2007, 1st Global stopped performing transfer agent services for Glisson, which had the effect of making it impossible for Glisson to continue engaging in the business of buying and selling CMKM stock. Glisson attempted to engage in transactions without using 1st Global by entering into private contractualarrangements with prospective buyers in which he pledged to transfer all ownership rights and benefits associated with the shares being sold. This effort was unsuccessful.FIRST CLAIM FOR RELIEFUNREGISTERED OFFER AND SALE OF SECURTIESViolations of Sections 5(a) and 5(c) of the Securities Act21. The Commission realleges and incorporates by reference paragraphs through 20 above.22. Defendant Glisson, by engaging in the conduct described above,directly or indirectly, made use of means or instruments of transportation or communication in interstate commerce or of the mails, to offer to sell or to sell securities, or to carry or cause such securities to be carried through the mails or in interstate commerce for the purpose of sale or for delivery after sale.23. No registration statement was filed with the Commission or was ineffect with respect to the offerings alleged herein.24. By engaging in the conduct described above, Glisson violated, andunless restrained and enjoined will continue to violate, Sections 5(a) and 5(c) of the Securities Act, 15 U.S.C. §§ 77e(a) and 77e(c).SECOND CLAIM FOR RELIEFFAILURE TO REGISTER AS A BROKER-DEALERViolations of Section 15(a) of the Exchange Act25. The Commission realleges and incorporates by reference paragraphs 1 through 20 above.26. Defendant Glisson, by engaging in the conduct described above, made use of the mails or means or instrumentalities of interstate commerce to effect transactions in, or to induce or attempt to induce the purchase or sale of, securities, without being registered as a broker or dealer in accordance with Section 1 5(b) of the Exchange Act, 15 U.S.C. § 78o(b).27. By engaging in the conduct described above, defendants Glissonviolated, and unless restrained and enjoined wil continue to violate, Section l5(a) of the Exchange Act, 15 U.S.C. § 78o(a).PRAYER FOR RELIEFWHEREFORE, the Commission respectfully requests that the Court:I.Issue findings of fact and conclusions of law that Glisson committed the alleged violations.II.Issue an order, in a form consistent with Fed. R. Civ. P. 65(d) permanently enjoining Glisson, his agents, servants, employees, and attorneys, and those persons in active concert or participation with any of them, who receive actual notice of the judgment by personal service or otherwise, and each of them, from violating Sections 5(a) and 5(c) of the Securities Act, 15 V.S.C. §§ 77e(a) & 77e(c), and Section l5(a) of the Exchange Act, 15 V.S.C. § 78o(a).III.Order Glisson to disgorge all ill-gotten gains from his illegal conduct, together with prejudgment interest thereon.IV.Order Glisson to pay civil penalties pursuant to Section 20( d) of theSecurities Act, 15 U.S.C. § 77t(d), and Section 2l(d)(3) of the Exchange Act, 15 U.S.C. § 78u(d)(3).V.Issue an order, in a form consistent with Rule 65(d) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, permanently prohibiting Glisson from participating in any offering of penny stock pursuant to Section 20(g) of the Securities Act, 15 U.S.C. § 77t(g), and Section 2l(d)(6) of the Exchange Act, 15 U.S.C. § 78u(d)(6).VI.Retain jurisdiction of this action in accordance with the principles of equity and the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure in order to implement and carry out the application or motion for additional relief within the jurisdiction of this Court.VII.Grant such other and further relief as this Court may determine to be just and necessary.DATED: January 15, 2009PARIS A. WYNNAttorney for PlaintiffSecurities and Exchange Commission
Dead Beat Dads in Michiganwww.accesskent.com/InmateLookup/
Jan 16, 2009 8:55:21 GMT -4
Post by ivory on Jan 16, 2009 8:55:21 GMT -4
Last Edit: Jan 16, 2009 8:56:06 GMT -4 by ivory
Jan 16, 2009 11:28:18 GMT -4
Post by chrisl on Jan 16, 2009 11:28:18 GMT -4
Jan 15, 2009 20:12:53 GMT -4 portrush said:Well, the others you mentioned weren't engaged in the same practice were they? No. So to try and make the leap is kinda stretching it a bit, imo.pr portrush,Did you even read the complaint against Marco? Or are you just doing what you normally do and read the boards without knowing the facts?Read below portrush I copied and pasted it for you to save you some time.I remember sitting in Mona's where her and others changed the word from "certs for sale" to "cookies for sale".koolmoney sat in INES and Mona's and bragged about making $75,000.00 in selling certs with Deli.Did you know most of the rumors of payouts today stemmed from guys like Deli and koolmoney just to name a few. These rumors then change a little to fit another liars needs.Wake up for once portrush I really do not think you are this gullible.Glisson frequented a number ofintemet chat rooms in which current13 and prospective CMKM shareholders exchanged information and propagated14 rumors regarding CMKM. The chat rooms provided Glisson with a pool of15 individuals in which to solicit purchases and sales of CMKM stock. Under the16 screen name "Deli dog" or "Deli," Glisson entered the chat rooms and posted17 messages indicating that he was wiling to purchase and sell CMKM stock and18 provided contact information for interested parties. As a result, prospective19 purchasers and sellers used chat room discussions, email messages and telephone20 calls to contact Glisson. Glisson also identified prospective purchasers and sellers21 through referrals from individuals with whom he engaged in transactions involving
Last Edit: Jan 16, 2009 11:28:57 GMT -4 by chrisl
Jan 16, 2009 11:48:33 GMT -4
Post by gurumaster on Jan 16, 2009 11:48:33 GMT -4
Delidog is on the run! Dead Beat Dads in Michiganwww.accesskent.com/InmateLookup/
Jan 16, 2009 13:10:41 GMT -4
Post by portrush on Jan 16, 2009 13:10:41 GMT -4
Jan 16, 2009 11:28:18 GMT -4 chrisl said:Jan 15, 2009 20:12:53 GMT -4 portrush said:Well, the others you mentioned weren't engaged in the same practice were they? No. So to try and make the leap is kinda stretching it a bit, imo.pr portrush,Did you even read the complaint against Marco? Or are you just doing what you normally do and read the boards without knowing the facts?Read below portrush I copied and pasted it for you to save you some time.I remember sitting in Mona's where her and others changed the word from "certs for sale" to "cookies for sale".koolmoney sat in INES and Mona's and bragged about making $75,000.00 in selling certs with Deli.Did you know most of the rumors of payouts today stemmed from guys like Deli and koolmoney just to name a few. These rumors then change a little to fit another liars needs.Wake up for once portrush I really do not think you are this gullible.Glisson frequented a number ofintemet chat rooms in which current13 and prospective CMKM shareholders exchanged information and propagated14 rumors regarding CMKM. The chat rooms provided Glisson with a pool of15 individuals in which to solicit purchases and sales of CMKM stock. Under the16 screen name "Deli dog" or "Deli," Glisson entered the chat rooms and posted17 messages indicating that he was wiling to purchase and sell CMKM stock and18 provided contact information for interested parties. As a result, prospective19 purchasers and sellers used chat room discussions, email messages and telephone20 calls to contact Glisson. Glisson also identified prospective purchasers and sellers21 through referrals from individuals with whom he engaged in transactions involvingChrisl,Thanks for your concern for my understanding. I did, in fact, read it all. I understand these points you raise. I have greater concern for what transactions may have taken place with shares sold for Steven Brewer, who is said to be a friend of Frizzell, and whether or not this provides any implication of Frizzell. Add to that the endorsement by Kevin and the "approval" process initiated by the company before these shares could be transferred. Those who post on the boards may have to answer one day, but I am more interested in knowing if the company and its attorney are knowingly or unknowingly complicit in any way. I invested in the company, not the boards.pr vcdude
One of the Original CMKX Lunatics
Jan 16, 2009 14:54:19 GMT -4
Post by vcdude on Jan 16, 2009 14:54:19 GMT -4
Jan 17, 2009 19:24:31 GMT -4
Post by jack on Jan 17, 2009 19:24:31 GMT -4
Jan 21, 2009 13:01:47 GMT -4
Post by chrisl on Jan 21, 2009 13:01:47 GMT -4
Jan 16, 2009 13:10:41 GMT -4 portrush said:Jan 16, 2009 11:28:18 GMT -4 chrisl said:portrush,Did you even read the complaint against Marco? Or are you just doing what you normally do and read the boards without knowing the facts?Read below portrush I copied and pasted it for you to save you some time.I remember sitting in Mona's where her and others changed the word from "certs for sale" to "cookies for sale".koolmoney sat in INES and Mona's and bragged about making $75,000.00 in selling certs with Deli.Did you know most of the rumors of payouts today stemmed from guys like Deli and koolmoney just to name a few. These rumors then change a little to fit another liars needs.Wake up for once portrush I really do not think you are this gullible.Glisson frequented a number ofintemet chat rooms in which current13 and prospective CMKM shareholders exchanged information and propagated14 rumors regarding CMKM. The chat rooms provided Glisson with a pool of15 individuals in which to solicit purchases and sales of CMKM stock. Under the16 screen name "Deli dog" or "Deli," Glisson entered the chat rooms and posted17 messages indicating that he was wiling to purchase and sell CMKM stock and18 provided contact information for interested parties. As a result, prospective19 purchasers and sellers used chat room discussions, email messages and telephone20 calls to contact Glisson. Glisson also identified prospective purchasers and sellers21 through referrals from individuals with whom he engaged in transactions involvingChrisl,Thanks for your concern for my understanding. I did, in fact, read it all. I understand these points you raise. I have greater concern for what transactions may have taken place with shares sold for Steven Brewer, who is said to be a friend of Frizzell, and whether or not this provides any implication of Frizzell. Add to that the endorsement by Kevin and the "approval" process initiated by the company before these shares could be transferred. Those who post on the boards may have to answer one day, but I am more interested in knowing if the company and its attorney are knowingly or unknowingly complicit in any way. I invested in the company, not the boards.pr portrush,There you go again skating around the question at hand.Are you even capable of answering a question. Here is an example:Portrush do you know what time it is?You are the kind of person that would answer the time is 11:00 a.m. yet that is not the question I asked.The question is do you know what time it is?The proper answer is yes I do.This goes for Marco. You sidestepped the question and went onto Frizzell. I do agree with you on this but that is not what I asked you.This is the same stuff you do all the time.
Jan 21, 2009 20:42:47 GMT -4
Post by portrush on Jan 21, 2009 20:42:47 GMT -4
The only question you asked was did I read the complaint. The answer (again) in more simple terms for you is, yes. The balance of your entire post appears to be your color commentary for your perspective.Not that I feel one iota of accountability to you.pr chrisl
Jan 22, 2009 9:34:18 GMT -4
Post by chrisl on Jan 22, 2009 9:34:18 GMT -4
I copied and pasted the questions I asked you. You read the first question and avoided the next question about Marco. portrush you are part of the problem and not solution. You are a member of every pro-board and moderator on a few of them.Marco Glisson is guilty yet you move onto Frizzell. Frizzell might be guilty but you have to start with Marco. How many certs were you given from Marco Glisson?I already know your answer will be none but I tend believe differently. When they name people which they eventually will portrush will your name be on there?Continue the hard work of deflecting stuff away from the true crooks like Urban, Edwards and Marco. Your time will come soon enough.portrush,Did you even read the complaint against Marco? Or are you just doing what you normally do and read the boards without knowing the facts?Read below portrush I copied and pasted it for you to save you some time.I remember sitting in Mona's where her and others changed the word from "certs for sale" to "cookies for sale".koolmoney sat in INES and Mona's and bragged about making $75,000.00 in selling certs with Deli.Did you know most of the rumors of payouts today stemmed from guys like Deli and koolmoney just to name a few. These rumors then change a little to fit another liars needs.Wake up for once portrush I really do not think you are this gullible.Glisson frequented a number ofintemet chat rooms in which current13 and prospective CMKM shareholders exchanged information and propagated14 rumors regarding CMKM. The chat rooms provided Glisson with a pool of15 individuals in which to solicit purchases and sales of CMKM stock. Under the16 screen name "Deli dog" or "Deli," Glisson entered the chat rooms and posted17 messages indicating that he was wiling to purchase and sell CMKM stock and18 provided contact information for interested parties. As a result, prospective19 purchasers and sellers used chat room discussions, email messages and telephone20 calls to contact Glisson. Glisson also identified prospective purchasers and sellers21 through referrals from individuals with whom he engaged in transactions involving portrush
Jan 22, 2009 14:50:35 GMT -4
Post by portrush on Jan 22, 2009 14:50:35 GMT -4
Chrisl,Only the first sentence seems to be a plausible question. Semantics? Yes, but logical just the same...at least for me. I don't have the time or interest in deciphering posts.Since the core of your "concern" seems to be focused on what I think about those you accuse...for the record one last time; I have repeatedly stated that I sincerely hope anyone and everyone involved in taking advantage of the innocent, yet bonified shareholder, is held accountable to every extent the law provides. That includes those whose job it is to uphold the law, anyone associated with the company past or present and those involved in duping the shareholders along the way. It can't be any clearer than that. You can continue to assuage my character if you want, but your efforts won't affect an outcome equivalent to your misguided assumption.Oh my...bless your heart. I just realized something. You must be younger than I thought. Well if so, let me help you out. I used to have a penchant for wanting to prove myself right whenever possible...then I grew up and realized how silly it is. Nobody cares what I know or what I have, they may only care that they don't know it and they don't have it. I have no intention of being dragged into a continual dialog of useless banter and wasting my valuable time. You shouldn't either. I have nothing to prove, you have nothing to gain. It's really that simple. I'm just a shareholder--bonified at that.pr Last Edit: Jan 22, 2009 14:54:34 GMT -4 by portrush
MESSAGE FROM AL HODGES ... 12/18/2014
CEO KIRKPATRICK ... TAKE NOTICE: US OIL/GAS PERMITS DOWN 40%
VICTIMS NOTIFICATION: hearing December 8, 2014 by mullahpaloozer
Per CEO ...RE: Confirmation of the death of Urban Casavant by mullahpaloozer
LATEST POST FROM COMPANY CEO ... FWIW