Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Strategies & Market Trends : The DD Maven -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: rrufff who wrote (495)	12/23/2008 9:37:08 AM
From: shortsinthesand	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 736

Hi rrufff of course it is not a PM from you! It is however a real PM word for word that I received from a alias! That alias has accused me of many things and even has posted totally fabricated lies and libel against me and at the same time claimed I have done the same? Total nonsense and lies!!! No I don't have any PM's from you where you brutally attacked me because you never did in any PM's. I do have the original posts you made to me in responce to a post I made to another alias on the JPHC board where you did attack and ridicule me for calling it a fraud and Scam and I recommended people call the SEC. These posts are there for the public record and I WAS ABSOLUTELY RIGHT in my assessment and accurate with my facts that it was and is indeed a SCAM... I never received any apology on that issue! happy holidays SantaSands

To: rrufff who wrote (495)	12/23/2008 2:44:09 PM
From: im a survivor	1 Recommendation Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 736

You wanna see our actual, true and factual E-mail exchanges that can be proven to be accurate, word for word as well as who, when, where and how they were sent?Habitual liars will always be habitual liars....I just wish he would take legal action so I can give him some of what he desires.... <<Have you ever responded favorably to similar attacks or posters whose style is to post is such fashion, merely because you agreed with the attacking poster? Perhaps it's time to take a more objective view?>>