|
Post by imSINGLEruRICH on Aug 31, 2008 8:15:11 GMT -5
from the Milliomaire Board......
john3339 DIAMOND JEDI WARLORD And speaking of irrelevance:« Thread Started Today at 8:20pm »
Anyone else notice the absence of the August info-bits from the tyler boys?
OK, OK, they still have about 24 hours in August. But the last one came out more than a month ago, on July 18th (I believe).
Ya think they finally decided that EVERYTHING is none of our business?
john
|
|
|
Post by imSINGLEruRICH on Aug 31, 2008 8:16:09 GMT -5
By: jonathonanders 30 Aug 2008, 07:48 PM EDT Msg. 758734 of 758960 (This msg. is a reply to 758731 by weekendalias2.) Jump to msg. # bank I take it that you do know that unregistered shares are not the naked short. surely
so, this great company issued what over 1.3 trillion shares
over the 03-04 period
By: bankcollapse 30 Aug 2008, 07:54 PM EDT Msg. 758740 of 758960 (This msg. is a reply to 758734 by jonathonanders.) Jump to msg. # jonathon, i am starting to get a bad feeling about you, but i have no problem discussing this with a rational person who puts up a contrary opinion.
please don't be confused by the terminology used by the SEC. unregisterd is simply their acronym for NAKED SHORT SELLING.
the company did not issue them, the mm's brokers created them. they do not exist. they created "FAKE" names and "FAKE" shares to try and collapse the company. the shares were not sold to real people. they are still holding these "FAKE, COUNTERFEITED" shares and the forensic team will deal with them. All bona fides are locked and loaded in a safe trust.
hope that clears it up for you
By: jonathonanders 30 Aug 2008, 07:59 PM EDT Msg. 758742 of 758960 (This msg. is a reply to 758740 by bankcollapse.) Jump to msg. # ok not going to debate this any more with you, you dont even understand the basics of the stock market. The nss is over and ABOVE the 1.3
A broker MM or otherwise cant create a cert, only the company and thereby the TA
Maybe the sec is using this unreg business to cover the bigger nss problem, i dont know , but your scenario is not valid.
By: weekendalias2 30 Aug 2008, 08:03 PM EDT Msg. 758744 of 758960 (This msg. is a reply to 758742 by jonathonanders.) Jump to msg. # jonath - the 1.3 is above 703B
|
|
|
Post by imSINGLEruRICH on Aug 31, 2008 8:17:05 GMT -5
By: weekendalias2 30 Aug 2008, 08:04 PM EDT Msg. 758745 of 758961 (This msg. is a reply to 758734 by jonathonanders.) Jump to msg. # jonath - it seems to me the brokers were nssing the extra shares through the DTC
By: weekendalias2 30 Aug 2008, 08:05 PM EDT Msg. 758746 of 758961 Jump to msg. # I spoke with Helen and she said she did nothing illegal
By: weekendalias2 30 Aug 2008, 08:06 PM EDT Msg. 758747 of 758961 Jump to msg. # Helen even joked and said -If I was guilty I would have been shut down but instead we are still working so what does that tell you
By: weekendalias2 30 Aug 2008, 08:07 PM EDT Msg. 758748 of 758961 Jump to msg. # she even laughed about no arrests - she is confused why the brokers who shorted were not named
|
|
|
Post by imSINGLEruRICH on Aug 31, 2008 8:18:03 GMT -5
By: bankcollapse 30 Aug 2008, 07:48 PM EDT Msg. 758735 of 758961 (This msg. is a reply to 758731 by weekendalias2.) Jump to msg. # weekendalias2, i agree, ok back to the topic at hand. so weekendalias, do you think that's why they did the divy with cim, so they could prove that the nss was infact 1.2 trillion or more?
By: weekendalias2 30 Aug 2008, 08:12 PM EDT Msg. 758754 of 758961 (This msg. is a reply to 758735 by bankcollapse.) Jump to msg. # bank -yes I do - CIM divy was a tool and was also used to protect the orignal investors -1 for 1 CIM n 2003 was powerful and masterful
|
|
|
Post by imSINGLEruRICH on Aug 31, 2008 8:18:49 GMT -5
By: weekendalias2 30 Aug 2008, 08:10 PM EDT Msg. 758752 of 758961(This msg. is a reply to 758750 by bankcollapse.) Jump to msg. # Bank - do you think some brokers created fake certs and thats why the forensics were used? By: bankcollapse 30 Aug 2008, 08:13 PM EDT Msg. 758755 of 758961(This msg. is a reply to 758752 by weekendalias2.) Jump to msg. # weekendalias2, no, brokers cannot create certs, but i'm sure you meant to say "SHARES". they created "FAKE" shares using "FAKE" names they created on their systems. many brokers and mm's did that. using the stock borrow loopholes they created trillions of "FAKE" shares which in turn crushed the stock value of companies and they were forced out of business. of course, then CMKX came along and the game changed By: nufced 30 Aug 2008, 08:16 PM EDT Msg. 758758 of 758961(This msg. is a reply to 758755 by bankcollapse.) Jump to msg. # "using the stock borrow loopholes" Helen testified under oath that she did not know what the stock borrow program was, if I remember right.
|
|
|
Post by imSINGLEruRICH on Aug 31, 2008 8:19:54 GMT -5
By: weekendalias2 30 Aug 2008, 08:04 PM EDT Msg. 758745 of 758961 (This msg. is a reply to 758734 by jonathonanders.) Jump to msg. # jonath - it seems to me the brokers were nssing the extra shares through the DTC By: weekendalias2 30 Aug 2008, 08:05 PM EDT Msg. 758746 of 758961 Jump to msg. # I spoke with Helen and she said she did nothing illegal By: weekendalias2 30 Aug 2008, 08:06 PM EDT Msg. 758747 of 758961 Jump to msg. # Helen even joked and said -If I was guilty I would have been shut down but instead we are still working so what does that tell you By: weekendalias2 30 Aug 2008, 08:07 PM EDT Msg. 758748 of 758961 Jump to msg. # she even laughed about no arrests - she is confused why the brokers who shorted were not named By: jonathonanders 30 Aug 2008, 08:17 PM EDT Msg. 758759 of 758961(This msg. is a reply to 758745 by weekendalias2.) Jump to msg. # By: weekendalias2 30 Aug 2008, 08:04 PM EDT Msg. 758745 of 758757 (Msg. is a reply to 758734 by jonathonanders.) jonath - it seems to me the brokers were nssing the extra shares through the DTC You just making this up as you go along arent ya lol If you knew anything about the market you would realize how idiotic that statement is You need to go back to the basics on exactly what a naked short is
|
|
|
Post by imSINGLEruRICH on Aug 31, 2008 8:20:32 GMT -5
By: weekendalias2 30 Aug 2008, 08:44 PM EDT Msg. 758817 of 758961 Jump to msg. # another interesting comment from Helen:
She said it was the SEC who wanted the legend on the certs - for this distribution only -SEC has been involved for a long time
|
|
|
Post by imSINGLEruRICH on Aug 31, 2008 8:21:16 GMT -5
By: grajekk 30 Aug 2008, 09:37 PM EDT Msg. 758862 of 758961 (This msg. is a reply to 758749 by weekendalias2.) Jump to msg. # I wonder if my local SB manager knew what was going on, and that's why I was never allowed to buy shares thru them... That's why I couldn't figure out how SB/citi could be involved when they weren't selling shares to me... It may have been the manager trying to protect the people in town here... I may have to apologize to him when all is said and done, because maybe in his mind he figured he was doing the right thing for the local clients. My broker even quit when I started to raise heck about not being able to buy CMKX... I shore wish the powers in charge would make this be over soon before any more of my friggin beans snap!!!
By: weekendalias2 30 Aug 2008, 09:39 PM EDT Msg. 758865 of 758962 (This msg. is a reply to 758862 by grajekk.) Jump to msg. # graj, remember some brokers only allowed sells (cover)
|
|
|
Post by imSINGLEruRICH on Aug 31, 2008 8:22:45 GMT -5
By: aladin99 30 Aug 2008, 10:00 PM EDT Msg. 758909 of 758962 Jump to msg. # WA/BC...she probably knows.. some sukers from Sec too.......ones who used to revoke many penny stocks by bashers' reports...........
By: bankcollapse 30 Aug 2008, 10:01 PM EDT Msg. 758913 of 758962 (This msg. is a reply to 758909 by aladin99.) Jump to msg. # aladin, wow, that would be rico stuff wouldn't it?
By: aladin99 30 Aug 2008, 10:06 PM EDT Msg. 758920 of 758962 (This msg. is a reply to 758913 by bankcollapse.) Jump to msg. # Bank...janice is a specialist too on reporting so called bad insiders to SEC....they both have been very successful because the facts that 95% of penny stocks ends up in the dump...Hope this one will save the system and put bankers/brokers/hedge hogs and their bashers in hell........
|
|
|
Post by imSINGLEruRICH on Aug 31, 2008 8:23:23 GMT -5
By: bankcollapse 30 Aug 2008, 10:33 PM EDT Msg. 758945 of 758963 Jump to msg. # ok, so when helen mentioned 2.2 trillion shares in the testimony, were those registered or unregistered? and when 1.2 or so got surrendered where they then registered or unregistered? what about the 639 billion certed shares, are those registered or unregistered? does the 'for this distribution only" make them registered or unregistered? are nss registered or unregistered?
thanks for all the help, you seem so smart
By: jonathonanders 30 Aug 2008, 10:44 PM EDT Msg. 758948 of 758963 (This msg. is a reply to 758945 by bankcollapse.) Jump to msg. # I dont really know what shares in those numbers were registered and which were not
I will try to get an answer to whether the shares were a part of the total or above the 703 on Tues
From what Helen is saying, it sounds like shes saying that the shares issued at revocation was 703, this would be inclusive of the 622. But honestly, I dont know for sure
|
|
|
Post by imSINGLEruRICH on Aug 31, 2008 8:25:06 GMT -5
By: bankcollapse 30 Aug 2008, 10:06 PM EDT Msg. 758921 of 758963 Jump to msg. # jonathon, when a stock is borrowed but never delivered, is it a registered stock or unregistered stock?
By: jonathonanders 30 Aug 2008, 10:21 PM EDT Msg. 758934 of 758963 (This msg. is a reply to 758923 by bankcollapse.) Jump to msg. # Its a Failed to Delivered Stock, better named, Naked Short per your question in msg 758921
An unregistered share is one given to insiders etc, it is also called a RESTRICTED share
Must serve at least a year restriction
A lawyer can then sign off on it, however it then has to be registered with the sec before traded. The unregs were put in the market without being registered with the SEC
Hope that explained it clearly enough for you
By: bankcollapse 30 Aug 2008, 10:23 PM EDT Msg. 758936 of 758963 (This msg. is a reply to 758934 by jonathonanders.) Jump to msg. # jonathon, so you are saying the company gave all the shares to the insiders of the company, and no shares existed on the market at all?
how did we trade billions per day
By: jonathonanders 30 Aug 2008, 10:30 PM EDT Msg. 758944 of 758963 (This msg. is a reply to 758936 by bankcollapse.) Jump to msg. # Dont understand the question
However you have to realize that 622 billion shares were dumped on the market in 20 months, i think the bulk was flooded in summer of 04
remember when you look at the daily Volume, you divide it by 2
That being said, i do think theres a naked short in cmkx on TOP of the unregistered shares
There are some variables here also, when urban bought the shell, the preexisting shares of the shell were suppose to be RS'ed I dont think they were I cant remember exactly how many shares were preexisting been a while since i saw the number
Also, its not clear in the lawsuit if the 622billion was over and above the 703 billion or part of it. Not sure how we could get a definitive answer on that
By: bankcollapse 30 Aug 2008, 10:36 PM EDT Msg. 758946 of 758963 (This msg. is a reply to 758944 by jonathonanders.) Jump to msg. # but jonathon, weekend posted that 703 billion shares were owned by 2032 shareholders in march of 2005. and since then 39,000 shareholders have been certed with 639 billion shares, so how is that possible?
By: jonathonanders 30 Aug 2008, 10:46 PM EDT Msg. 758950 of 758963 (This msg. is a reply to 758946 by bankcollapse.) Jump to msg. # The 703 billion is for certs and street shares, not just the 2032 shareholders That has been varified
|
|
|
Post by imSINGLEruRICH on Aug 31, 2008 8:26:20 GMT -5
hundredtoone Diamond Wiz (Moderator) Re: RUMORS........Updated Daily« Reply #343 Yesterday at 11:45pm » NSS were sold mostly through CANADIAN BROKERS IMO after JE placed the convertible pipe in CANADA...with 300 BILLION shares in the account BROKERS and MMs could use RULE 100 in CANADA to create 10 shares for every one of EDWARDS shares...they could BORROW 10 on every share...so they could have created 3 TRILLION shares LEGALLY in CANADA...but the ILLEGAL part was when they FAILED TO DELIVER...then when we were REVOKED those FTDs became COUNTERFIET shares..the COUNTERFIET CERTS is ANOTHER MATTER if there were any...IMO...then the shares traded through MANY BROKERS ...UNDER THE WATCHFUL EYES OF REGULATORS till we were finally HALTED...IMO... A. Early Formation of CMKM 13. In 2002, Urban Casavant (Casavant) accumulated over 1,000,000 acres of mineral claims in and around Saskatchewan, Canada. To raise funds to develop these claims, Casavant came to Las Vegas, Nevada. Casavant met a group of penny-stock promoters led by individuals named John Edwards and Gary Walters. Edwards and Walters promised to raise $100,000,000 for Casavant to develop the mineral claims. 14. In order to facilitate this plan, in or around the end of 2002, Edwards and his group of investors procured a publicly traded shell company and merged the shell with Casavants company. The shell company had little or no assets and carried an enormous amount of convertible debt with non-dilution provisions. The stock of the resulting new company (CMKI later to become CMKM Diamonds, Inc.) began public trading in November of 2002. Casavant began promoting his stock to penny stock investors with the help of John Edwards and his crew of experienced penny-stock promoters. 15. The true facts regarding the shell company and its converted debt were never conveyed to shareholders of the company by management through its public filings, as requiredby law. www.sec.gov/comments/s7-19-07/s71907-233.htmTHE NEED FOR DARKNESS It is no accident that the participants in most naked short selling frauds are obsessed with darkness whether it is the secrecy-obsessed hedge funds, market makers, offshore banks, prime brokers, clearing firms, “Nominee corporations”, etc. The very nature of naked short selling as being such a blatantly heinous type of fraud necessitates that the main players operate in the dark. In the United States of America in this day and age how else BUT IN THE DARK could you sell that which you don’t own to a naïve Mom and Pop investor/ retiree, take their money, pay a little collateral on the debt until the share price predictably tanks, send the investor a monthly brokerage statement IMPLYING the blatant MISREPRESENTATION that what he or she purchased were indeed legitimate “Shares” and that they were indeed “Delivered” in good form and are being “Held long” somewhere, then refuse to deliver that which you sold to him or her and then pocket the proceeds. To top that off how else BUT IN THE DARK could you continue to sell yet more nonexistent shares into the onrush of buy orders of opportunistic investors sensing a bargain at the current ridiculously low share price levels, take their money also, collateralize this debt for a short term and then smother the issuer’s share structure with a plethora of yet more mere “Share entitlements” thereby hopefully either bankrupting or inducing the 12-J deregistration of the targeted issuer and then move on to the next targeted company? www.thesanitycheck.com/Portals/0/JDSEC.pdf...Flying Moose(cmkxunofficial
|
|
|
Post by imSINGLEruRICH on Aug 31, 2008 8:26:51 GMT -5
By: aladin99 30 Aug 2008, 11:04 PM EDT Msg. 758953 of 758963 Jump to msg. # I believe the system normally does not care about what so called unregistered shares (US)...insiders sold their restricted shares all the times and this is exactly like backdated options...there's no difference...Why the SEC cares about CMKX??? This is the sting operation and since UC has found oil otherwise the STING would fail....and the sting normally targets the big NSS and never intend to get the insiders of a 0.0001 company.....
|
|
|
Post by imSINGLEruRICH on Aug 31, 2008 8:27:35 GMT -5
By: weekendalias2 30 Aug 2008, 11:12 PM EDT Msg. 758956 of 758963 (This msg. is a reply to 758950 by jonathonanders.) Jump to msg. # Lil bedtime story for Jonath:
Shares Outstanding and Stockholders of Record.
In the March 4, 2005 press release, the Company disclosed it had 703,518,875,000 shares of common stock issued and outstanding to approximately 2,032 stockholders of record (excluding shares held in "street name").
Several stockholders have raised concern over what the previous statement actually means. The issued and outstanding share number includes all shares of common stock issued and outstanding as of March 4, 2005, including those held by stockholders in their respective brokerage accounts and/or other nominee names.
A stockholder of record is a person/entity that holds an actual certificate for shares of the Company's common stock in its name. Therefore, the Company has 2,032 stockholders that hold certificates in their own name.
2032 certed shareholders holding 703,518,875,000 before (8-K) March 2005 + 38,000 “NEW” shareholders after Macrh 2005 = The case of CMKX represents the greatest "counterfeit shares" fraud in the UNITED STATES. CMKM DIAMONDS, INC. suffered THE LARGEST NAKED SHORT IN HISTORY.
|
|
|
Post by imSINGLEruRICH on Aug 31, 2008 8:27:59 GMT -5
By: sully47 30 Aug 2008, 11:13 PM EDT Msg. 758958 of 758963 Jump to msg. # Well, I guess ACCA was...
blowing smoke up our collective azzes again! Well.....payback is a biotch! ACCA....remember that and who posted it!
|
|