|
Post by soonerlew on May 1, 2009 17:12:46 GMT -5
ines DIAMOND JEDI WARLORD Re: It's Been A ? * (Acca related posts) « Reply #9902 Today at 2:11pm » -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Yesterday at 10:09pm, seagull wrote: What happened last night is this, we heard acca is coming in,, and people got in the rooms. other rooms find people to pipe sound from gv to their rooms. people pmed other people to come in if they want to hear acca Acca was logged in before 10pm then suposedly he tried talkign but there was no sound he wrote what he wrote above then suposedly he was going to start another computer i could go along with this since i had message open with him and it showed that he logged out and in again. he was logged in until midnight, people waiting, and then signed off. desperado tried to call him but his phone was bussy desperado sent him a text message but he did not answer desperado apologized to people for acca, as if its his fault. his phone was obviously working just fine, but he simply chose to ignore us and desperado. he did not type again even obviously his typing was just fine even if his mic was not nor did he call desperado. but he did remember to log out around midnight. any point to all this, by all those people that waited? no unfortunately that is classic acca. as much as people may associate acca with old times of high hopes.. and musical evenings full of promises, and the reason why they want to hear it and wait.. I have to say that he plain does not give a d**n. he did not come back to comment on citi, and he did not even post or say anything about cmkx We all wrote to acca on this boards asking questions about citi, or trading in citi after his post and he just did not care to respond. Last nite, whether he had something to say or not about cmkx..he could of cut it short or call desp and say that is all. You know , it does not matter. Its just at some point you have to realize that a person just does not give a d**n. I guess that is the nicest thing and most short description of last nite and his nonresponsivenes after that citi post. « Last Edit: Today at 2:22pm by ines » millionaires.proboards.com/index.cgi?board=main&action=display&thread=19007&page=496
|
|
|
Post by soonerlew on May 1, 2009 17:14:42 GMT -5
bmaccat1 DIAMOND DIGGER Re: It's Been A ? * (Acca related posts) « Reply #9908 Today at 3:40pm » -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- I pulled this off Investor's hub with google: Posted by: nufced Date: Friday, May 01, 2009 1:05:57 AM In reply to: dia duit who wrote msg# 271594 Post # of 271629 Nice..and heres the latest..from accadacca345: Citi= Knight Knight!!! accadacca345: 21 Gun Frickin' Salute!!!! To Each And Everyone Of You!!! My Hats Off! diamondsr4me: ACCA, one question.......can I write my Resignation Letter tonight ? accadacca345: Let Me Write It For You Diamonds.................. I Quit! Regards, Bob millionaires.proboards.com/index.....=19007&page=496
|
|
|
Post by soonerlew on May 1, 2009 17:30:00 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by chris on May 1, 2009 17:34:44 GMT -5
Ines has been lost for a while now; wodan, well, everyone knows what wodan portrays.
|
|
|
Post by johnjrambothe2nd on May 1, 2009 17:38:34 GMT -5
ines DIAMOND JEDI WARLORD Re: It's Been A ? * (Acca related posts) « Reply #9902 Today at 2:11pm » -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Yesterday at 10:09pm, seagull wrote: What happened last night is this, we heard acca is coming in,, and people got in the rooms. other rooms find people to pipe sound from gv to their rooms. people pmed other people to come in if they want to hear acca Acca was logged in before 10pm then suposedly he tried talkign but there was no sound he wrote what he wrote above then suposedly he was going to start another computer i could go along with this since i had message open with him and it showed that he logged out and in again. he was logged in until midnight, people waiting, and then signed off. desperado tried to call him but his phone was bussy desperado sent him a text message but he did not answer desperado apologized to people for acca, as if its his fault. his phone was obviously working just fine, but he simply chose to ignore us and desperado. he did not type again even obviously his typing was just fine even if his mic was not nor did he call desperado. but he did remember to log out around midnight. any point to all this, by all those people that waited? no unfortunately that is classic acca. as much as people may associate acca with old times of high hopes.. and musical evenings full of promises, and the reason why they want to hear it and wait.. I have to say that he plain does not give a d**n. he did not come back to comment on citi, and he did not even post or say anything about cmkx We all wrote to acca on this boards asking questions about citi, or trading in citi after his post and he just did not care to respond. Last nite, whether he had something to say or not about cmkx..he could of cut it short or call desp and say that is all. You know , it does not matter. Its just at some point you have to realize that a person just does not give a d**n. I guess that is the nicest thing and most short description of last nite and his nonresponsivenes after that citi post. « Last Edit: Today at 2:22pm by ines » millionaires.proboards.com/index.cgi?board=main&action=display&thread=19007&page=496 IF A MAN HAS A DOCUMENTED HISTORY OF ABANDONING HIS OWN FLESH & BLOOD (CHILDREN), NOT TO MENTION 5 YEARS WORTH OF PURE LIES, YET HUNDREDS OF PEOPLE WAIT TO HEAR FROM HIM IN REVERENT ANTICIPATION; THE STIGMA OF CMKX SHAREHOLDERS BEING A CULT BECOMES MORE APPARENT, UNFORTUNATELY.
|
|
|
Post by soonerlew on May 1, 2009 17:42:20 GMT -5
By: rosencrantz2010 01 May 2009, 06:58 AM EDT Rating: Msg. 829862 of 829920
Jump to msg. # OH MY GOD! it's May 1 and still no settlement check!
By: rosencrantz2010 01 May 2009, 07:06 AM EDT Rating: Msg. 829863 of 829920
Jump to msg. # and here i thought those guys like ACCA and RICHY and the other numb-nuts swore that this was it. april 17 or 18, then it was the third week in april, then it became the 30th of april. lol
why don't you guys in paltalk (i get to read about it on the pro29 board) verbally beat those LIARS about the head and shoulders? pound those lying basttarrds. berate them. call them on their lies. they've been lying to you for years and laughing all the while. humiliate them for their most recent lies and show anyone that steps forward with similar lies exactly what they can expect to receive in the way of a verbal beating when they lie about some payout coming.
those liars deserve to be taken to the woodshed. i wouldn't hesitate for a moment to humiliate those creeps.
|
|
|
Post by soonerlew on May 1, 2009 17:43:46 GMT -5
By: rosencrantz2010 01 May 2009, 07:08 AM EDT Rating: Msg. 829864 of 829920
Jump to msg. # and what's this latest legal stuff involving DELI mean? it looks like we're talking about the fall before that case is dealt with,,, right?
you would think this stuff is as complicated as WATERGATE given the amount of time everyone seems to need to get things done.
By: rosencrantz2010 01 May 2009, 07:09 AM EDT Rating: Msg. 829865 of 829920
Jump to msg. # AND leslie HAKAKAKAKALALA, what are you doing? where is that summary judgement? do you guys really do any work in the SEC?
By: rosencrantz2010 01 May 2009, 07:11 AM EDT Rating: Msg. 829866 of 829920
Jump to msg. # HEY! FBI, i thought you guys were involved in this case? you know that after five years some of the people involved in the case start dying on you.
if that what you are waiting on? do you want some of the criminals to die before you interview them? lol
maybe you want the CMKX case to turn into one of those COLD CASES so you can make it into a TV series?
|
|
|
Post by soonerlew on May 1, 2009 17:47:25 GMT -5
By: rosencrantz2010 01 May 2009, 07:12 AM EDT Rating: Msg. 829867 of 829920 Jump to msg. # here's the CMKX case,,, www.imdb.com/title/tt0368479/ By: rosencrantz2010 01 May 2009, 07:22 AM EDT Rating: Msg. 829868 of 829920 Jump to msg. # Each episode of Cold Case follows a formula that begins with a flashback scene that establishes the year -- sometimes the actual date -- in which the crime took place, as well as a set of characters in a seemingly mundane situation. These flashbacks feature a different style of direction, whether it be the colors, lighting, shading, or camera angles. Flashbacks often match a style from that era, such as a black-and-white flashback depicting the 1950s. The next scene shows the victim(or victims)--usually one of those introduced earlier--as discovered at time or sometime later after having first been declared missing. With some exceptions however there is no corpse but indications of stock fraud in which the victim has been robbed without any trace. The show then flashes to the present day, with the detectives of the Fraud Division of the Philadelphia police department prompted to reinvestigate an old case gone cold following, for example, a revelation of new evidence, discovery of the victim's stock portfolio, or a witness from TYLER who has decided to come forward. The detectives then give the cold case a new look and begin researching the victim and interviewing their friends, acquaintances, and family. But this usually takes years resulting in further making the case colder. in the end, the director turns to the audience and say, "see, folks, this only goes to show you how incompetent your SEC and FBI are when it comes to investigating a case gone cold. after 10 years you lose the scent of the criminals. they've all escaped and investigators find it hard to track them down. if only the investigators had acted quickly at the time of the fraud. but then,,,, we wouldn't have this great TV series,,,, COLD CASE. be sure to turn in next week when we again bring you another real life COLD FRAUD CASE." By: rosencrantz2010 01 May 2009, 07:28 AM EDT Rating: Msg. 829869 of 829921 (Reply to 829868 by rosencrantz2010) Jump to msg. # next week's COLD CASE episode involves the investigation of a character named DELI-DOG. the case is unbelievably complex that at the time totally befuddled the SEC and FBI. let's see. the facts of the case were: 1. DELI got stock from someone and resold those shares. 2. DELI was told not to do it. 3. DELI did it anyway. 4. DELI was caught. 5. NOW, it's taking the SEC and FBI years to figure out what happened. they have put a full team of crack investigators on the case and hope to have it solved before the 2016 Olympics. 6. FOLKS at the SEC and FBI are all scratching their heads over this case. they say it's one of the most complex cases they have every handled. AND they say this DELI fellow is very shifty and they can't quite get a handle on this man or his motives. it's VERY, VERY complex and they aren't even sure if they will EVER be able to solve this tough, complex case. By: rosencrantz2010 01 May 2009, 07:29 AM EDT Rating: Msg. 829870 of 829921 Jump to msg. # HEADLINE in USA TODAY - "DELI CASE DOGS SEC AND FBI" By: rosencrantz2010 01 May 2009, 07:30 AM EDT Rating: Msg. 829871 of 829921 Jump to msg. # HEADLINE IN NY TIMES, "SEC ONE SICK PUPPY AFTER DELI CASE" By: rosencrantz2010 01 May 2009, 07:31 AM EDT Rating: Msg. 829872 of 829922 Jump to msg. # WASHINGTON POST, "HANG DOG FBI AND SEC CALLS IT QUITS ON DELI CASE" By: rosencrantz2010 01 May 2009, 07:36 AM EDT Rating: Msg. 829873 of 829922 Jump to msg. # "HAKAKAKAKLALA LOOKING FOR SMOKING GUN WIENER IN DELI DOG CASE" she says, "this dog man is one slippery pup. we're not sure if any of us in the entire Security and Exchange Commission are as smart as this hot dog salesman. we are hot on his trail but he's always seems to give us the slip. frankly, he's eating our lunch."
|
|
|
Post by soonerlew on May 1, 2009 17:48:06 GMT -5
By: rosencrantz2010 01 May 2009, 10:40 AM EDT Rating: Msg. 829879 of 829922 (Reply to 829878 by sharasilva)
Jump to msg. # i thought there was something funny about that guy wearing the turban at the race track!
even then i thought, "this could be a sign of the end times!"
cmkX is the SIGN!!!
|
|
|
Post by soonerlew on May 1, 2009 17:49:24 GMT -5
By: sportsman93306 01 May 2009, 12:11 PM EDT Rating: Msg. 829884 of 829922
Jump to msg. # APRIL WRAPPED UP. WISHFYL THINKING WILL GO FORWARD. STUPIDITY WILL BE DISTRIBUTED. MS IS RIGHT. THANKS SPORTSMAN
|
|
|
Post by soonerlew on May 1, 2009 17:50:33 GMT -5
By: cynthiae45 01 May 2009, 01:03 PM EDT Rating: Msg. 829889 of 829922 Jump to msg. # Interesting: www.cnbc.com/id/30517142 I thought the SEC stated there was no such thing as Naked Shorting, as did alot of other people on this board. Hmmmmmm, I guess they were wrong. LMAO
|
|
|
Post by soonerlew on May 1, 2009 17:51:54 GMT -5
By: planter82 01 May 2009, 01:33 PM EDT Rating: Msg. 829893 of 829922
Jump to msg. # By: AlanC 01 May 2009, 07:15 AM EDT Rating: Rate this post: Msg. 1182818 of 1182818 (Reply to 1182816 by AlanC)
Jump to msg. # Dear Ms. Shapiro: I understand according to a Reuters article you are looking for some good investigative reporters. Perhaps you should be careful of what you wish for! The Swine Flu will not hide the swine who have looked the other way while investors were pillaged! Alan S. Cameron ECame71225@aol.com
Retirement in a Ponzi scheme? A Credit Crisis or a Collapsing Ponzi Scheme? The Two Trillion Dollar Black Hole. Purge your mind for a moment about everything you’ve heard and read in the last decade about investing on Wall Street and think about the following business model: You take your hard earned retirement savings to a Wall Street firm and they tell you that as long as you “stay invested for the long haul” you can expect double digit annual returns. You never really know what your money is invested in because it’s pooled with other investors and comes with incomprehensible but legal looking prospectuses.
The heads of these Wall Street firms have been taking massive payouts for themselves, ranging from $160 million to $1 billion per CEO over a number of years. As long as new money keeps flooding in from newfangled accounts called 401(k)s, Roth IRAs, 529 plans for education savings, and hedge funds (each carrying ever greater restrictions for withdrawing your money and ever greater opacity) everything appears fine on the surface. And then, suddenly, you learn that many of these Wall Street firms don’t have any assets that anybody wants to buy. Because these firms are both managing your money as well as having their own shares constitute a large percentage of your pooled investments, your funds begin to plummet as confidence drains from the scheme.
Now consider how Wikipedia describes a Ponzi scheme:
“A Ponzi scheme is a fraudulent investment operation that involves promising or paying abnormally high returns (‘profits’) to investors out of the money paid in by subsequent investors, rather than from net revenues generated by any real business. It is named after Charles Ponzi…One reason that the scheme initially works so well is that early investors – those who actually got paid the large returns – quite commonly reinvest (keep) their money in the scheme (it does, after all, pay out much better than any alternative investment). Thus those running the scheme do not actually have to pay out very much (net) – they simply have to send statements to investors that show how much the investors have earned by keeping the money in what looks like a great place to get a high return. They also try to minimize withdrawals by offering new plans to investors, often where money is frozen for a longer period of time…The catch is that at some point one of three things will happen:
(1) the promoters will vanish, taking all the investment money (less payouts) with them;
(2) the scheme will collapse of its own weight, as investment slows and the promoters start having problems paying out the promised returns (and when they start having problems, the word spreads and more people start asking for their money, similar to a bank run);
(3) the scheme is exposed, because when legal authorities begin examining accounting records of the so-called enterprise they find that many of the ‘assets’ that should exist do not.”
Looking at outcomes 1, 2, and 3 above, here’s where we are today. The promoters have clearly not vanished as in outcome 1. In fact, they are behaving as if they know they have nothing to fear. As over $2 trillion of taxpayer money is rapidly infused through Federal Reserve loans and over $125 Billion in U.S. Treasury equity purchases to keep these firms from collapsing, the promoters are standing at the elbow of the President-Elect in press conferences (Citigroup promoter, Robert Rubin); they are served up as business gurus on the business channel CNBC (former AIG CEO and promoter, Maurice “Hank” Greenberg); they are put in charge of nationalized zombie firms like Fannie Mae (Herbert Allison, former President of Merrill Lynch); they are paying $26 million and $42 million, respectively, for new digs at 15 Central Park West in Manhattan, where their chauffeurs have their own waiting room (Lloyd Blankfein, CEO of Goldman Sachs; Sanford “Sandy” Weill, former CEO of Citigroup, who put his penthouse in the name of his wife’s trust, perhaps smelling a few pesky questions ahead over the $1 billion he sucked out of Citigroup before the Fed had to implant a feeding tube).
We are definitely seeing all the signs of outcome 2: the scheme is collapsing under its own weight; there are panic runs around the globe wherever Wall Street has left its footprint.
But outcome 3 is the most fascinating area of departure from the classic Ponzi scheme. Legal authorities have, indeed, examined the books of these firms, except for one area we’ll discuss later. They found worthless assets along with debts hidden off the balance sheet instead of real depositor funds. Instead of arresting the perpetrators and shutting down the schemes, Federal authorities have developed their own new schemes and pumped over $2 trillion of taxpayer money into propping up the firms while leaving the schemers in place. Equally astonishing, Congress has not held any meaningful investigations. This has left many Wall Street veterans wondering if the problem isn’t that the firms are “too big to fail” but rather “too Ponzi-like to prosecute.” Imagine the worldwide reaction to learning that all the claptrap coming from U.S. think-tanks and ivy-league academics over the last decade about efficient market theory and deregulation and trickle down was merely a ruse for a Ponzi scheme now being propped up by a U.S. Treasury Department bailout and loans from our central bank, the Federal Reserve.
Fortunately for American taxpayers, Bloomberg News has some inquiring minds, even if our Congress and prosecutors don’t. On May 20, 2008, Bloomberg News reporter, Mark Pittman, filed a Freedom of Information Act request (FOIA) with the Federal Reserve asking for detailed information relevant to whom the central bank was giving these massive loans and precisely what securities these firms were posting as collateral. Bloomberg also wanted details on “contracts with outside entities that show the employees or entities being used to price the Relevant Securities and to conduct the process of lending.” Heretofore, our opaque central bank had been mum on all points.
By law, the Federal Reserve had until June 18, 2008 to answer the FOIA request. Here’s what happened instead, according to the Bloomberg lawsuit: On June 19, 2008, the Fed invoked its right to extend the response time to July 3, 2008. On July 8, 2008, the Fed called Bloomberg News to say it was processing the request. The Fed rang up Bloomberg again on August 15, 2008, wherein Alison Thro, Senior Counsel and another employee, Pam Wilson, informed the business wire service that their request was going to be denied by the end of September 2008. No further response of any kind was received, including the denial. On November 7, 2008, Bloomberg News slapped a federal lawsuit on the Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve, asserting the following:
“The government documents that Bloomberg seeks are central to understanding and assessing the government’s response to the most cataclysmic financial crisis in America since the Great Depression. The effect of that crisis on the American public has been and will continue to be devastating. Hundreds of corporations are announcing layoffs in response to the crisis, and the economy was the top issue for many Americans in the recent elections. In response to the crisis, the Fed has vastly expanded its lending programs to private financial institutions. To obtain access to this public money and to safeguard the taxpayers’ interests, borrowers are required to post collateral. Despite the manifest public interest in such matters, however, none of the programs themselves make reference to any public disclosure of the posted collateral or of the Fed’s methods in valuing it. Thus, while the taxpayers are the ultimate counterparty for the collateral, they have not been given any information regarding the kind of collateral received, how it was valued, or by whom.”
As evidence that Bloomberg News is not engaging in hyperbole when it uses the word “cataclysmic” in a Federal court filing, consider the following price movements of some of these giant financial institutions. (All current prices are intraday on November 12, 2008):
American International Group (AIG): Currently $2.16; in May 2007, $72.00
Bear Stearns: Absorbed into JPMorganChase to avoid bankruptcy filing; share price in April 2007, $159
Fannie Mae: Currently 65 cents; in June 2007 $69.00
Freddie Mac: Currently 79 cents; in May 2007 $67.00
Lehman Brothers: Currently 6 cents; in February 2007, $85.00
What all of the companies in this article have in common is that they were writing secret contracts called Credit Default Swaps (CDS) on each other and/or between each other. These are not the credit default swaps recently disclosed by the Depository Trust and Clearing Corporation (DTCC). These are the contracts that still live in darkness and are at the root of why the Wall Street banks won’t lend to each other and why their share prices are melting faster than a snow cone in July.
A Credit Default Swap can be used by a bank to hedge against default on loans it has made by buying a type of insurance from another party. The buyer pays a premium upfront and annually and the seller pays the face amount of the insurance in the event of default. In the last few years, however, the contracts have been increasingly used to speculate on defaults when the buyer of the CDS has no exposure to the firm or underlying debt instruments. The CDS contracts outstanding now total somewhere between $34 Trillion and $54 Trillion, depending on whose data you want to use, and it remains an unregulated market of darkness. It is also quite likely that none of the firms that agreed to pay the hundreds of billions in insurance, such as AIG, have the money to do so. It is also quite likely that were these hedges shown to be uncollectible hedges, massive amounts of new capital would be needed by the big Wall Street firms and some would be deemed insolvent.
Until Congress holds serious investigations and hearings, the U.S. taxpayer may be funding little more than Ponzi schemes while companies that provide real products and services, legitimate jobs and contributions to the economy are left to fail.
PAM MARTENS
Pam Martens worked on Wall Street for 21 years; she has no security position, long or short, in any company mentioned in this article. She writes on public interest issues from New Hampshire.
jack@reed.senate.gov
|
|
|
Post by soonerlew on May 1, 2009 17:53:37 GMT -5
By: ravenpeach1 01 May 2009, 06:34 PM EDT Rating: Msg. 829919 of 829922 (Reply to 829915 by stockrich0) Jump to msg. # StockRich.... Here is my take.... Entourage reported its Financials up to Dec 2008 Now we wait for Entourage to tell us what has or is happening to 1st Qtr in 2009...... I expect to hear something..... soon.... I expect to get something regardless or Entourage though.... Now I await Monetary's more pronounced reading..... God Bless Ravenpeach
|
|
|
Post by soonerlew on May 1, 2009 17:54:31 GMT -5
By: mkaykay0 01 May 2009, 06:03 PM EDT Rating: Msg. 829918 of 829923
Jump to msg. # This board is dying a slow death, only 54 posts all day long.
|
|
|
Post by soonerlew on May 1, 2009 20:27:30 GMT -5
skibuff Jack of Diamonds goodbye nns new york times « Thread Started Today at 7:02pm » -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- artical in the business day new york times saying goodbye to naked shorting. Funny that,that young lady at the trial said nns does'nt exeist! wonder why it's in the paper now and she worked for the sec! what a nut! oooooohhhh! that was anut nazerith! cmkxgroup.proboards.com/index.cgi?board=general&action=display&thread=21253
|
|