|
Post by straighttalk on Apr 16, 2011 18:57:00 GMT -5
Anybody scared that their payment is not coming? ;D NOPE
|
|
|
Post by marbearcat on Apr 16, 2011 21:42:05 GMT -5
Anybody scared that their payment is not coming? ;D NOPE ;D Laughing @ ewe ;D
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 17, 2011 8:39:31 GMT -5
Straighttalk ... this guy is ...
mccurdydon1: ok whos working late tonight mccurdydon1: a friend of mine got a call from Paris Wynn of the SEC mccurdydon1: he ask for him to testify against delidog mccurdydon1: he said we would never get paid mccurdydon1: it wierd that they called him out of the blue mccurdydon1: he is just a working man mccurdydon1: not on any boards mccurdydon1: yes he bought shares in 2005 mccurdydon1: there were 3 guys who I worked with who bought and only one got the call mccurdydon1: its weird out of the blue for him to get the call mccurdydon1: they are going to fly him into Vegas and put him up in a hotel mccurdydon1: i might go with him dopplerdan: I think that the SEC has nothing solid on Deli mccurdydon1: but I am sure they would have gone the other way if he had not agreed mccurdydon1: they have him dead to rights mccurdydon1: according to Paris Wynn mccurdydon1: I hope they hang Deli and his pumpers mccurdydon1: like Shelia she was telling everyone that the SEC was getting ready to pay .02 and deli was selling a ton out the back door mccurdydon1: and then Shelia sold shares mccurdydon1: the same with Wyatt mccurdydon1: and then Hodges was paid and he gave them a loan mccurdydon1: so they can say they were not paid
|
|
|
Post by squeezebox on Apr 17, 2011 8:49:48 GMT -5
sounds like a good ole fashion lynching is in order for some people involved in this. I can tell you one thing, once this country really falls into chaos and the riots start, which almost seems inevitable if something doesn't change, I know a few people who better make themselves "unavailable"...
|
|
|
Post by Ed Jagacki on Apr 17, 2011 9:00:47 GMT -5
Straighttalk ... this guy is ... mccurdydon1: ok whos working late tonight mccurdydon1: a friend of mine got a call from Paris Wynn of the SEC mccurdydon1: he ask for him to testify against delidog mccurdydon1: he said we would never get paid mccurdydon1: it wierd that they called him out of the blue mccurdydon1: he is just a working man mccurdydon1: not on any boards mccurdydon1: yes he bought shares in 2005 mccurdydon1: there were 3 guys who I worked with who bought and only one got the call mccurdydon1: its weird out of the blue for him to get the call mccurdydon1: they are going to fly him into Vegas and put him up in a hotel mccurdydon1: i might go with him dopplerdan: I think that the SEC has nothing solid on Deli mccurdydon1: but I am sure they would have gone the other way if he had not agreed mccurdydon1: they have him dead to rights mccurdydon1: according to Paris Wynn mccurdydon1: I hope they hang Deli and his pumpers mccurdydon1: like Shelia she was telling everyone that the SEC was getting ready to pay .02 and deli was selling a ton out the back door mccurdydon1: and then Shelia sold shares mccurdydon1: the same with Wyatt mccurdydon1: and then Hodges was paid and he gave them a loan mccurdydon1: so they can say they were not paid Okay, I've been wondering for a while nowe... Who is mccurdydon and where does his "intel" come from? Sometimes he reminds me of treffey the way he lurches back and forth in his messages... Ed P.S. I'm not saying I think he's Treffey, because I don't. Just sometimes I think he shares his bi-polar tendencies.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 17, 2011 9:07:46 GMT -5
ED .....mccurdy goes all the way back.... he has been up and down....I also think he does not have the soruces he says JMO...BUT, its as good as we see from the others! ....WHO KNOWS!
|
|
|
Post by e362 on Apr 17, 2011 9:44:43 GMT -5
Didn't AH mention mcurdy as one that knows whats going on or do I have him confused with another?
|
|
|
Post by Ed Jagacki on Apr 17, 2011 9:52:10 GMT -5
Al Hodges, January 2011:
2. Tramp understands very well what’s been going on; he is not alone – Pixie gets it, Deltadon gets it, Chucky gets it, etc. etc. etc.
|
|
|
Post by snifferpup on Apr 17, 2011 10:13:14 GMT -5
mccyurdydon seems to be painting a picture like the SEC would like........................Actually both Wyatt and Sheila transferred shares to friends and family members..
I have a mind to call Paris Wynn and ask why Judge Murrey needed it to be explained to her just what was Naked Short Selling during the Kangaroo of 2005, when she presided over a case concerning Naked Short selling in 1997/1998.......going from memory here, so it could be 1996...
The problem with my mind is that I no longer have the link..................I posted it back in 2007, but trying to go back 10,000 posts on a pro-board is like committing hairy Carey................But I would imagine it's still out there on the net for all you hounds that want to research~
|
|
|
Post by bjenkins on Apr 17, 2011 10:14:34 GMT -5
murcyurdydon seems to be painting a picture like the SEC would like........................Actually both Wyatt and Sheila transferred shares to friends and family members..
I have a mind to call Paris Wynn and ask why Judge Murrey needed it to be explained to her just what was Naked Short Selling during the Kangaroo of 2005, when she presided over a case concerning Naked Short selling in 1997/1998.......going from memory here, so it could be 1996...
The problem with my mind is that I no longer have the link..................I posted it back in 2007, but trying to go back 10,000 posts on a pro-board is like committing hairy Carey................But I would imagine it's still out there on the net for all you hounds that want to research~ I think the 2005 court case was about CMKX not filing reports and the 2005 court case had nothing to do with NSS?
|
|
|
Post by snifferpup on Apr 17, 2011 11:00:59 GMT -5
murcyurdydon seems to be painting a picture like the SEC would like........................Actually both Wyatt and Sheila transferred shares to friends and family members..
I have a mind to call Paris Wynn and ask why Judge Murrey needed it to be explained to her just what was Naked Short Selling during the Kangaroo of 2005, when she presided over a case concerning Naked Short selling in 1997/1998.......going from memory here, so it could be 1996...
The problem with my mind is that I no longer have the link..................I posted it back in 2007, but trying to go back 10,000 posts on a pro-board is like committing hairy Carey................But I would imagine it's still out there on the net for all you hounds that want to research~ I think the 2005 court case was about CMKX not filing reports and the 2005 court case had nothing to do with NSS? bjenkins.............. You are correct................However, during the proceeding when Attorney Bill Frizzell was aloud to speak, while mentioning the term, "Naked Short Selling, ,,,Judge Murray interrupted and asked what Naked short selling was..........................Going from memory here so you would have to read the transcripts...........................First point is that a SEC attorney should know what it is and it's definition.............................She acted like it was a foreign terminology.....................................If she asked for Bill Frizzel to spin that out for her like the Judge did for Al Hodges when he asked in reference to the DTCC, then one can understand the reason, which would be no more than a clarification for those that might not know the the term DTCC..................In the transcripts and recording, it was clear that Judge Murray was not asking for clarification for the benefit of others, but asking for herself because she did not know...
Racking my brain from memory so I could be wrong and if so, someone I'm sure will correct Old Yeller here~
|
|
|
Post by bjenkins on Apr 17, 2011 11:15:57 GMT -5
I think the 2005 court case was about CMKX not filing reports and the 2005 court case had nothing to do with NSS? bjenkins.............. You are correct................However, during the proceeding when Attorney Bill Frizzell was aloud to speak, while mentioning the term, "Naked Short Selling, ,,,Judge Murray interrupted and asked what Naked short selling was..........................Going from memory here so you would have to read the transcripts...........................First point is that a SEC attorney should know what it is and it's definition.............................She acted like it was a foreign terminology.....................................If she asked for Bill Frizzel to spin that out for her like the Judge did for Al Hodges when he asked in reference to the DTCC, then one can understand the reason, which would be no more than a clarification for those that might not know the the term DTCC..................In the transcripts and recording, it was clear that Judge Murray was not asking for clarification for the benefit of others, but asking for herself because she did not know...
Racking my brain from memory so I could be wrong and if so, someone I'm sure will correct Old Yeller here~But I think there is no more NSS because the bad guys settled and put the money in the trust and when they did that there was no more NSS so do you think there is still NSS?
|
|
|
Post by snifferpup on Apr 17, 2011 11:25:09 GMT -5
bjenkins................ That's an entirely different subject..........................My beliefs fall in-line with Al Hodges~
|
|
|
Post by bjenkins on Apr 17, 2011 11:37:01 GMT -5
bjenkins................ That's an entirely different subject..........................My beliefs fall in-line with Al Hodges~ I think that is 1 of the problems we have because some people think there is still NSS and if there was still NSS then there is no money in the trust and some people think the NSS was settled and money put in the trust and it must be one or the other and it can not be both.
|
|
|
Post by johnjrambothe2nd on Apr 17, 2011 11:40:15 GMT -5
At this point in time, a pump and dump by Hodges and other co-conspirators, is just as plausible as any of the other theories, positive or negative....IMO
|
|