Pluvias, because we now all know that you're a deceitful poster (with an exceedingly foul mouth to boot, like Moon Man), you're really many people posting under a single alias, obvious by now because posting style changes from day to day - and all other friends of racketeering enterprises and friends of "deregulation" in the form of making massive, organized, consistent and repeated lying, cheating, stealing. i.e. fraud, perfectly acceptable and legal if it involves in any way the Internet, stocks, and securities recommendations, please answer this one, simple and direct question:
1. Did any of you ever issue securities recommendations to the public for fees?
If not, then I wonder what exact qualification you would have to determine the intentions of securities analysts at the IA sites. Then, you have none whatsoever. Sorry.
I did, through the site I established, Stock Operators, named after the classic book by Edwin Lefevre. I knew very well that my clients who paid me the highest fees ever in day trading, $2,500 a month, would rely on all of my calls. I made very clear that all calls must be followed, because as I posted here earlier the strategy was not to be right all the time - as my GOOG puts could fail, I'm not Carnac but the risk/reward was worth it - but even with a high percentage of winners, one big winner and huge profits, plus very few calls, low commissions. If you review that site:
stock-operators.com
which has been closed to any and all clients for 4 years, you'll see that I made contractually clear that I had no affiliation with any brokers and did not trade the securities recommendations. No other site ever constructed a contract like mine did. The contract was for the benefit of my clients, so that if I engaged in any of the kinds of chicanery that other sites and brokers did, they could sue me into the Stone Age. I had nothing to hide.
I expected my clients to execute on the calls. When I was at TP, I expected TP traders to execute as well. Those who did very well. My GOOG call is one, and it's a risk, one call, will not prove or disprove the allegations in my lawsuit. A record needs to be built over time. I did, traders paid me huge fees after 3 1/2 months of no fees and, after only a few months of fees, I advised them to quit trading completely. Now, how many sites made that kind of recommendation? Torpedoed their own company in the interest of their clients, putting them FIRST? I did.
So, when I make these statements, I earned the right. I also ran a site and know the difference between an honest one and one run by racketeering criminals. Saying no one was expected to take the calls is outlandish - and I have transcripts from before they were destroyed proving that reliance on the calls was a given. Every site knew very well all clients were expected to trade the calls, and if they did not all bets were off, they were to blame. Now we here that by following them IA clients are to blame. Whatever.
The majority of self-serving posts here were in favor of acquittals in Brooklyn federal court. The verdicts? Guilty times two dozen criminals offenses. Similarly, we'll see how my litigation pans out, if as I hope it leads to not only a civil judgment, but criminal charges that lead to lengthy prison sentences for Berber, Moor and Rea. In this case, after six full years of deceit and obstruction of justice, I have absolutely not the slightest sympathy for especially Philip Berber, and, if called, will testify at his criminal sentencing, which, considering the scope of Berber's illegal conduct, and the damage caused to thousands of innocent Americans, far surpassing that of Tony, Royer et al, his longtime abuse of the judicial system while falsely and brazenly accusing me thereof, should be exceedingly severe.
The provable, criminal racketeer Philip Berber has, with substantial assistance, not least the vast proceeds of his many crimes, done his utmost to make a mockery of our justice system; we'll see if he succeeds in the end. |
