Gary, The following statement I don't understand:
<Do you realize you are one of the reasons the Wall Street Journal did that article on me.>
Prior to Feb. 24, 1999 I never heard of John R.Emshwiller, the staff writer for the WSJ.
I read the article and felt it had more holes than Swiss Cheese; none of which I see as the fault of the writer. I believe he accepted whatever information he was given in good faith and published it. In my personal opinion I feel you <may> have viewed it as an opportunity to reestablish your creditability and gain sympathy.
Prior to the article, you, had for the most part, ceased to do a lot of posting. After a brief period of time, when no negative feed back appeared on the threads; as a result of the article, you returned to prolific posting on many threads and took up where you left off before going into a self imposed exile of sorts. So the statement made to
Emshwiller, that you had for the most part withdrawn from the Internet chat forums was not to last long. These are my thoughts and opinions and right or wrong I am entitled to them.
I have researched and discovered many things prior to as well as after the article was published and stand by my opinions.
You appear to be bitter on many things most of which appear to me to be of your own doing.
You asked how I was duped. In all honesty, I feel you <may> have duped myself and many others,on the MIDL/ Arcon Energy threads. Personally, had I realized you were drafting / editing a single press release I would have sold all my stock on the run-up. I, believed all press releases were handled by the company;not someone who claimed to be just an investor like the rest of us on the thread.
Actually, I have you to thank for alerting me to the possibility you were in fact somewhat involved. When a SUNDAY afternoon press release appeared on Midland;in August,referencing the Noble House deal, the
first red flag went up. It is not common practice for most companies to release news on a Sunday. From there I began to analyze the releases and became suspicious that you may have been involved; turns out I was correct. Yet you and your cronies attack me viciously and did all in your power to discredit me. Why? The truth is always best because as you say; it will come out sooner or later; which in turn discredits anyone involved in trying to cover-up the real truth and facts. I was flamed and an all out effort was made to discredit me by you and your supporters. But, Truth, is the Ultimate defense.
You hate me because I had the audacity to question you about matters you did not want disclosed. However, in light of the tremendous amounts of money many had invested in Midland I felt everyone had a right to know. In my opinion the image you endeavored to create of yourself was not exactly accurate. As I pointed out in another post to you, the investors have a right to know the particulars of anyone who is up-front and directly involved with company business. I would say drafting/editing press releases and having access to inside information prior to the investing public qualifies you as one who was directly involved.
Message 8811255
You say I have done much to actually "help" you. Allow me to return the compliment. Thanks to you I began to see the importance and many
new angles to investigating any and all connected to a company before investing in them. For that I offer you a heartfelt thanks.
After witnessing the Midland fiasco first hand I began to run any company and its connected entities under a microscope,if I so much as suspect possible irregularities. I will continue to remain diligent to disclose any person or company I feel is less than squeaky clean.
While I used to find SEC filings boring and difficult, I have since taught myself to read and study them as well as checking for cases filed or pending with the SEC for fraud. The SEC web site is the first line of defense for every investor. To not use that resource is folly.
My reason for asking you opinion on debentures was because from what I can see they are a recipe for disaster. I asked your opinion but because you are, as always in a defensive mode, did not get the courtesy of an intelligent reply.
What lead to my question is the research I have been doing on DMEC. I see there are debentures and in my opinion, based on what knowledge I have I would say they are NOT in the best interests of an investor.
Sooner or later the stock will most likely be diluted. Now, if you have knowledge to the contrary, please share it. It should be the goal of all to enlighten and share knowledge. If for no other reason than to avoid the tremendous losses that we both know occur daily in the otc-bb markets.
I shall continue to endeavor to stick with facts, as I have always done. What you claim is innuendos, is based on facts I have uncovered. While I choose not to reveal many of my sources unless I have it in front of me inked to paper, does not mean my information is not without merit and serious consideration.
One very positive thing we both seem to agree on is NEVER trust anyone. Check them out and verify everything.
Have a great weekend and best Regards,
Dusty |
