|
|
Post by bhollenegg on Aug 24, 2007 23:11:24 GMT -6
BRIG and My69z...very interesting. The unprofessional behavior does not sit well with me. Hopefully, what you point out is correct.
All the best,
BHollenegg
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 25, 2007 6:34:58 GMT -6
Bob, I agree with that, also. The Faulking radio show especially doesn't sit well with me. That stupid bet and the followup. Firing Debi the way they did. The overwhelming need to control and contain information, despite spewing platitudes to the contrary. All of that leaves an ugly memory. The only bright spot being the way in which Debi handled herself after that ugliness. Her integrity in that mess shone a bright light in contrast to the ugliness which threw her unceremoniously on the street.
The bottom line is, I believe they are being controlled. but they have their own agendas as well. This is the same crowd who in 2004 were already plotting to take over the company because of their large combined number of shares. This is the same crowd who has always lorded over others in the group, their seeming inside sharing and secret sharing of knowledge.
Wherever there is chance for profit, greed will raise its ugly head. IBM knows this and I am confident he brought Fizzle inside to be controlled. Which is not the same as not allowing him free will. Texas may be running on a long leash right now and doing ugly things. But I do not believe they were unanticipated.
In a Machiavellian Dance of global proportions, we have a lot of ugliness surrounding us. Perhaps by allowing the general focus to be all eyes on Texas they are granted the simple luxury of a little time out from under the microscope of our scrutiny. And, if in the process some ugliness is exposed from within, well then so much the better for it to be cut out like so much rotten flesh. Shares can be canceled. Specific shares can be canceled. We've got good examples of that already with the various JVs. Resignations can be called for. The ever present reality of needing to spend more time with family can always raise its head. Things change.
Enjoy the show, Bob. It is a once in a lifetime, perhaps once in a millennium grand event.
Cheers.
|
|
|
|
Post by veritasvincit on Aug 25, 2007 9:14:35 GMT -6
Q) if there are no assets and no claims.. why are we returning to trading? What value of a company will there be for the shareholders? Excellent question St1ck, that one's been bugging me for quite some time. -------------------------------- From FAQ # 2: "Prior management and previous company attorneys refuse to produce records or offer assistance in any way to Mr. West." From CMKM Update, April 20, 2007: "Las Vegas, Nevada. “Dear fellow shareholders, I have information to share with you today that came to my attention just days ago. I received a delivery of several boxes of corporate records in the last couple weeks that have confirmed my very worst fears." -------------------------------- Which one is it? As so many have stated, these FAQ's bring about more questions at times than they answer. |
|
|
|
Post by Twist Capper on Aug 26, 2007 1:14:39 GMT -6
NSS is not a main concern? But Frizzel 'had' proof - and John Martin sent it to the FBI.........  BrainDamage Retired Staffer Re: John Martin says we turned NSS info over to FBI « Reply #17 on Jul 18, 2005, 6:22pm » Okay, I just got the word from John that they have, indeed, turned over the same info to the FBI that they had provided to the judge. -BD |
|
|
|
Post by veritasvincit on Aug 26, 2007 14:12:57 GMT -6
Excellent question St1ck, that one's been bugging me for quite some time. -------------------------------- From FAQ # 2: "Prior management and previous company attorneys refuse to produce records or offer assistance in any way to Mr. West." From CMKM Update, April 20, 2007: "Las Vegas, Nevada. “Dear fellow shareholders, I have information to share with you today that came to my attention just days ago. I received a delivery of several boxes of corporate records in the last couple weeks that have confirmed my very worst fears." -------------------------------- Which one is it? As so many have stated, these FAQ's bring about more questions at times than they answer. V,,,,those boxes were from a personal attorney of Urbans and they were company records.........that's why they had to give'em up. My bet,,,,,,it's common for one CEO to request docs from all sources of prior Mgt's dealings. Later Eh Z, good point, but... If those were indeed 'company' records then the following statement from FAQ #2, "Prior management and previous company attorneys refuse to produce records or offer assistance in any way to Mr. West", is false. Urban was prior managment, yes? Urban's attorney, whether private or corporate, has turned over 'corporate records', yes? (I don't know for certain those records were corporate, but we'll go with that) This then means records have been turned over, the statement by new mgmt is untrue.  , I'm picking at the little things. but it's the little things that never seem to add up when dealing with this 'company'. (both old & new) These FAQ's, while answering some questions, tend to bring up many more unanswered in the same breath. Double talk does not sit well with me. L8r |
|
|
|
Post by ivory on Aug 26, 2007 17:41:48 GMT -6
Q) When the 7 boxes of information appeared who provided this information? Was it one of Urban's original attorneys?
~The attorney that provided the 7 boxes of documents was a personal attorney of Urban Casavant.~
Why the attorney did not destroy the Info??
Why UC owns 1.2B shares still and he could have sold them ~0.0006-0.0012~?
I believe UC is a good guy and we have the goods!
Awesome!!!!!!!!!!!!
|
|
, I'm picking at the little things. but it's the little things that never seem to add up when dealing with this 'company'. (both old & new) These FAQ's, while answering some questions, tend to bring up many more unanswered in the same breath.