Some interesting stuff...!

[fastwalker]

StockGate: Note To Depository Trust & Clearing Corp.:

This Is What An ‘Opinion’ Looks Like / FinancialWire® <br>
April 18, 2005 (FinancialWire) Personal Privilege By Gayle Essary / We at Investrend were recently as stunned and disturbed as anyone else when the powerful and reclusive Depository Trust & Clearing Corp. became a prime suspect in the sudden and inexplicable “indefinite postponement” by General Electric’s (NYSE: GE) “Dateline NBC” of what was expected to have been a shocking expose of the DTCC’s purported role now and over the years in the counterfeiting of electronic certificates supporting illegal naked short sales.

After all, the DTCC is presided over by such otherwise seemingly responsible and luminous institutions as the NASD and the NYSE, its two “preferred” shareholders, along with Jonathan E. Beyman, Chief Information Officer, Lehman Brothers (NYSE: LEH); Frank J. Bisignano, Chief Administrative Officer and Senior Executive Vice President, Citigroup / Solomon Smith Barney's Corporate Investment Bank (NYSE: C), and John W. Cummings, Senior Vice President & Head of Global Technology & Services, Merrill Lynch & Co. (NYSE: MER).

Surely none of these would be party to shenanigans that lead to the censorship or disabling of any media. But wait, you say, there is no proof. Maybe, not yet, but we don’t have to wait for proof that the DTCC engages in such un-American activities as press censorship.

The DTCC, an agent of SROs that gives it quasi-government status, has admitted outright that it has engaged in communications that are not only tortuous interference but that more to the point, seem to have put it in the glaring headlights of the First Amendment to the Constitution of the United States of America, that protects media from interference by any government institution:

“Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the government for a redress of grievances.”<br>
A prominent law school overview of the First Amendment is at www.law.cornell.edu/topics/first_amendment.html
The organization’s outside counsel, Proskauer Rose LLP, has written FinancialWire counsel Marshal Shichtman, Esq., not only readily admitting to its mischief, but actually expressing pride at its bullying.
The letter is posted in its entirety at www.investrend.com/Admin/Topics/Articles/Resources/349_1113403487.pdf

In the letter, attorney Charles S. Sims, in classic Orwellian double-speak, actually references the First Amendment as giving his clients the right to interfere with another’s First Amendment rights. Which, of course, is how we wind up here further exercising our opinion about his opinion about our opinion of the First Amendment, ad infinitus, we guess. The only difference is that neither this opinion nor our regular news are now distributed to the readers of Investors Business Daily or to finance news users at Yahoo (NASDAQ: YHOO), because the DTCC didn’t just express its opinion. Its communications were designed to squelch our rights to publish, and resulted in Investors Business Daily immediately taking down our news feed.

more...

[fastwalker]

What was the “First Amendment opinion” stated by the DTCC that cause this harm not only to our business but also to our rights of free expression? It was that FinancialWire is “not a bona fide news” provider.

We beg to differ, of course. No, we are adamant in our differing.

If our news articles leaned against counterfeiting of shares and naked short sales that’s because we have been working under the illusion that both are actually illegal. We have to say, however, that the recent postings by bureaucratic staff members on the SEC.gov site that says “not all naked short selling” is illegal and further, that those who did engage in illegal naked short sales before the beginning of 2005 have been granted a kind of stock market manipulation “amnesty” by a “grandfathering” that to our knowledge was neither asked for nor approved by the Congress or the President was another shocker that by now has just been layered on to a cacophony of shockers.

However, in the end that is something our readers will and can sort out and judge. Our readerships continue to grow rather phenomenally, even after the loss of these two outlets, so if you accept this readership growth as the measure, the “opinion” of the DTCC is dead wrong.

Whatever the case, the bottom line is that the readers at Investors.com and Yahoo! Finance no longer get to make that choice. The DTCC has made that choice for them.

If you’re a user of one of those services and that’s okay with you, we have no concerns. If it’s not okay with you, you can express your own opinion of this press censorship and interference to other media, to the two outlets, to the DTCC, to the two “preferred shareholders,” to any of the 21 DTCC board members, or in whatever means suits you.

Why did we call this un-American? First and foremost, you can contrast the variety of news you receive in America due to our Constitutional protections to those the public is allowed to receive in say, China, or say, Syria, or say, Myanamar, or say, Russia, or any authoritarian government. The press is your proxy. You do not have the time to ask questions or to dispute the statements of governments, institutions, or bureaucracies, so it is the role of the media to do that for you.

When an institution such as the DTCC takes it upon itself to decide for you what is news and what is not, simply because it does not like what it is reading, or it is asking too many questions or raising disturbing issues, we have a difficult time not seeing parallels.

Perhaps you were not yet an adult or fully aware of the press restrictions in oppressive regimes such as the Nazis or the Communists, but you most certainly were aware only four years ago that Russian President Vladimir Putin unilaterally shut down NTV, the only non-state-owned television channel in Moscow and replaced it with state-employed reporters and producers. You have surely seen the results of this in the scant Russian coverages of the Moscow theatre and school hostage situations, not to mention the Yukos debacle.

Maybe this comparison of the DTCC and Putin is more graphic to us because we were actually in Moscow when NTV was being shut down. This writer was on other business but accompanying the partner of Ted Turner, who was seeking to acquire NTV. Turner and our mutual business colleague met with Putin and in classic Turnerese, lectured the Russian president on the importance of a free press in his desires for a free market economy.

Putin would have nothing to do with Turner’s arguments, but did keep up the charade of allowing potential acquisition meetings to occur throughout the week this writer was present. Meanwhile the owner of NTV had already fled the country, and his second-in-command was under house arrest. We had the privilege of having an outing one evening with a dozen or so of the brave NTV editors, writers and producers, along with our business colleague, and they were already living in fear. They had their own armed guards stationed at all of the exits, to attempt to repel any sudden Putin-directed forces.

This writer shared an automobile back to the Metropole Hotel, whose balcony Lenin used to direct his revolution, and we were a little uneasy at various checkpoints since the hotel already had us mistakenly involved in the acquisition, and the Metropole was famously known to have been bugged. When our colleague was out, the hotel had called our room to ask us to retrieve a fax to him from Ted Turner, so if there was a sweep, we knew we were going to be in it.

Having escaped all this intact, it never occurred to us that Putin would be waiting for us back on American shores.

more...

[fastwalker]

So, now that we have begun here to actually express “opinions not news,” which is an equally responsible role for the media, we’re going to move right on to three opinions:

1. The Depository Trust and Clearing Corp. has become too large, too encompassing, too powerful, too unresponsive to those it serves, primarily the investing public, too unresponsive to the Congress under whose auspices it should be operating, and most of all, too arrogant.

First, it is time to unconflict it, with real public representations on its board.

Second, it is time to break it up, with its various duties provided by smaller agencies under separate unconflicted boards.

2. General Electric, the world’s second largest corporation, is beginning to show that it can not be both a multinational comglomerate and a faithful media steward.

First, it is time for General Electric to think about divesting NBC to a group whose sole business is to manage a free, untethered press and media establishment.

Second, if it will not do that, then it should put its news operations in the hands of an independent, journalistic board that is not answerable to the conglomerate. This is not a bad idea for CBS, ABC and FOX as well.

3. The SEC should take its unilateral decision about legal illegal naked short sales and its amnesty program to Congress and get its authority, or at the least, vote up or down at the Commission before letting its staff double-speak away law-breaking and law breakers.

So, now, DTCC, you have three examples of “opinion” to point to.
Why that disqualifies us from First Amendment protection or protection from your bullying, tortuous interferences, however, is beyond us.

Now, before ending this opinion piece, let’s enumerate your bosses, since we have not yet heard from them as to whether they support your Un-American tactics:

The DTCC’s two preferred shareholders are the New York Stock Exchange and the NASD, a regulatory agency that also owns the Nasdaq and until recently, the American Stock Exchange.
Other DTCC board members include Michael C. Bodson, Managing Director, Morgan Stanley (NYSE: MWD); Gary Bullock, Global Head of Logistics, Infrastructure, UBS Investment Bank (NYSE: UBS); Stephen P. Casper, Managing Director and Chief Operating Officer, Fischer Francis Trees & Watts, Inc.; Jill M. Considine,Chairman, President & Chief Executive Officer, The Depository Trust & Clearing Corporation (DTCC);

Also, Paul F. Costello, President, Business Services Group, Wachovia Securities (NYSE: WB); John W. Cummings, Senior Vice President & Head of Global Technology & Services, Merrill Lynch & Co. (NYSE: MER); Donald F. Donahue, Chief Operating Officer, The Depository Trust & Clearing Corporation (DTCC); Norman Eaker, General Partner, Edward Jones; George Hrabovsky, President, Alliance Global Investors Service; Catherine R. Kinney, President and Co-Chief Operating Officer, New York Stock Exchange; Thomas J. McCrossan, Executive Vice President, State Street Corporation (NYSE: STT); Bradley Abelow, Managing Director, Goldman Sachs (NYSE: GS); Jonathan E. Beyman, Chief Information Officer, Lehman Brothers (NYSE: LEH); and Frank J. Bisignano, Chief Administrative Officer and Senior Executive Vice President, Citigroup / Solomon Smith Barney's Corporate Investment Bank (NYSE: C), Eileen K. Murray, Managing Director, Credit Suisse First Boston (NYSE: CSR); James P. Palermo, Vice Chairman, Mellon Financial Corporation (NYSE: MEL); Thomas J. Perna, Senior Executive Vice President, Financial Companies Services Sector of The Bank of New York (NYSE: BNY); Ronald Purpora, Chief Executive Officer, Garban LLC; Douglas Shulman, President, Regulatory Services and Operations, NASD; and Thompson M. Swayne, Executive Vice President, JPMorgan Chase (NYSE: JPM).

Gayle Essary is CEO of Investrend Communications, Inc., and serves its Investrend Information unit as Publisher of FinancialWire. He has been a practicing journalist since 1958, is a member of the Online News Association and has been a member of both the Texas and National Press Association.

www.investrend.com/articles/article.asp?analystId=0&id=14720&topicId=160&level=16...

[fastwalker]

CMKX:

There is talk about taking possession of your certs and will that protect you from losing your holdings held in brokerage accounts?In other words,if you don't have your certs,do I then have virtual shares.

NO

I can't believe the anxiety rolling around..People must be getting nervous and assuming the worse..Well that's fine,but absolutely not worth the aggravation to think about it.

First of all,if you have your certs in a brokerage account,you have real shares and a cusip number..

If it makes you feel better to get hold of your certs,then get your shares,but when this issue starts moving,you will not be able to play until at least 3-5 days for your shares to move back to your broker..

In other words, you may be out of the loop and lose your mo-mo play at the current time and my friends,that will be the most critical.

It makes no difference whether you have your certs or not because of this so called or alledged NSS issue,but it will hamper your trading ability..

Your certs are safe with the broker of your choice and they are not virtual shares.That is just plain hogwash and spin..

Have a good day
Varok

[fastwalker]

OT?.....
Saskatchewan's Fort a la Corne Play set to soar..old, but worth a read…<br>http://www.kaiserbottomfish.com/s/Expresses.asp?ReportID=99289&_Title=Express-2005-03-Saskatchewans-Fort-a-la-Corne-Play-set-to-soar

[fastwalker]

OT: QBID to become fully reporting...
Triangle Multi-Media Begins Final Steps to Become a Fully Reporting Company

/18/2005 3:45:02 PM
PALM SPRINGS, Calif., Apr 18, 2005 (BUSINESS WIRE) -- Triangle Multi-Media, (PINK SHEETS:QBID) announced today that the company will meet this week with the law firm of Sichenzia, Ross, Friedman & Ference LLP to begin the process of removing themselves from the Pink Sheets.

Sichenzia, Ross, Friedman & Ference LLP will formally begin the preliminary application process to have Triangle Multi-Media become a fully reporting company, the prestigious law firm will immediately begin counseling Triangle Multi-Media on the requirements needed to be listed with another exchange.

"We have hired Sichenzia, Ross, Friedman & Ference LLP, one of the best law firms specializing in matters such as these, and we are confident that they will deliver," said Frank Olsen, President and CEO of Q Television Network. "QBID will be counseled on the most effective procedure for us to become a fully reporting company and we will act upon it very quickly."

About Q Television Network

This television network was organized to create and develop a network devoted to providing television programming for the gay and lesbian community. While the company expects much of its subscriber base to be comprised of members of the gay and lesbian population, management also believes that quality programming about the gay and lesbian experience, designed to entertain, educate and inform, will attract many other segments of the viewing public. The company's programming will be available on a subscription basis to those desiring its programming. The network will broadcast 24 hours per day, 7 days per week. Providing distribution via satellite ensures availability of the network across the United States, including Alaska, Hawaii and Puerto Rico. For further information on programming and subscriptions, please visit www .qtelevision .com.

Safe Harbor Statement

As a cautionary note to investors, certain matters discussed in this press release may be forward-looking statements within the meaning of the Private Securities Litigation Reform Act of 1995. Such matters involve risks and uncertainties that may cause actual results to differ materially, including the following: changes in economic conditions; general competitive factors; the television network's ability to execute its business model and strategic plans; and the risks described from time to time in the company's Securities and Exchange Commission filings.

SOURCE: Triangle Multi-Media

Media:
CWR & Partners, LLP
Ronnie Welch, 508-222-4802
Ronnie @cwrpartners .com
or
Investors:
Equity Relations, Inc.
Richard Brown, 978-767-0048
Staff @equityrelations .com

QBID retires 1 billion shares...
and is currently down 0.0002. I guess a company with fewer shares is worth less.

[fastwalker]

fastwalker said:

OT?.....
Saskatchewan's Fort a la Corne Play set to soar..old, but worth a read…<br>http://www.kaiserbottomfish.com/s/Expresses.asp?ReportID=99289&_Title=Express-2005-03-Saskatchewans-Fort-a-la-Corne-Play-set-to-soar

particularly liked the following:

(quote)
"But speculators should take heart in the emerging willingness of De Beers to move aggressively on assessing the world class diamond potential of its own Fort a la Corne kimberlites, a change of heart at least partly inspired by what De Beers has seen come out of the Star shaft. (Some urgency no doubt also arises from veiled expropriation threats by the South African government, of which the latest is the suggestion that De Beers move the DTC to South Africa or else...)"
(end quote)

Good Luck and it's all speculation at this point.

[fastwalker]

bill19336, I like this part also:

It is my understanding that a budget proposal for a three year program designed to deliver an inferred resource of 100 million carats to feed a 50,000-60,000 tpd facility is awaiting De Beers board approval. Three years ago Joe Joyce, the former head of De Beers Canada, told me it would take $100 million to properly assess Fort a la Corne, a number then but no longer scoffed at by Kensington management

[fastwalker]

Anyone remember this letter........... hope he's still fighting the good fight

Securities and Exchange Commission:
450 Fifth Street, NW
Washington, D.C. 20549-0609

Dear Mr. Katz,

Re: File # S7-23-03

The wording of the proposed Regulation SHO is very sketchy as to how you at the SEC intend to address the preexisting naked short positions that you uncover, and that everyone knows exist, while creating the "restricted lists" of corporations that qualify for the Rule 11830 "Mandatory Close-Out for Short Sales" protection. This protection is afforded to U.S. corporations with greater than 10,000 shares and one-half of 1% of the issued number of shares currently with "fails to deliver" or outstanding loans masking these "fails" in existence. Collectively these two categories are referred to as "open positions".

From an American investor's point of view there is obviously only one definitive solution in sight and that is to order the buy-in of these nonexistent entities sold to U.S. investors for their cash. Your failure to note this obvious solution in the text of the proposed Regulation SHO causes the American investors tremendous concern. If for some inexplicable reason you at the SEC do not immediately force the buy-in of these fraudulent transactions as you are not only empowered to do but also mandated to do as per the 1934 Act then there are over one hundred "tasks" that should be looked after immediately. A very small sampling of these include:

1) Refer these U.S. victim corporations and their shareholders to the U.S. Federal Regulator that does oversee the 1934 Act if our law books are inaccurate and you are not the agency with this power and mandate. Perhaps the Department of Labor that oversees the 1974 ERISA Act could at least address the crimes being committed regarding the shares in qualified retirement plans that so many U.S. investors can't seem to get the delivery of after making strong demands for. Remember that you are a branch of the Federal Government of the United States that is the sole possessor of this irrefutable evidence of a perhaps multi-trillion dollar fraud perpetrated on U.S. investors which has resulted in a massive decimation of the integrity of the securities markets. Remember also that your mission statement is, "The primary mission of the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) is to protect investors and maintain the integrity of the securities markets". American investors in micro cap securities are not asking you to follow up on your secondary or tertiary missions. They are not some kind of special interest group looking for handouts. They just want you to concentrate on your primary mission in this regard and to do what Congress ordered you to do.

2) Find out a way to warn PROSPECTIVE investors that are about to buy shares of these victim corporations with open positions in excess of the Rule 11830 parameters about the "Damaged goods" nature of these U.S. corporations. These investors are going to be receiving a much lesser percentage equity position "than advertised" and it is going to be of a much more damaged U.S. corporation "than advertised" because of the massive dilution created by the naked short sales. You know of the impending ambush, now warn these people of your findings. These "restricted lists" are obviously going to have to become public. The quantity of these "open positions" detected should be made public to allow these PROSPECTIVE investors to assess the degree to which the victim corporation has been damaged i.e. just what percentage of the total number of shares issued and outstanding, both real and counterfeit, his purchase of, let's say, 100,000 shares will amount to. Also please warn PROSPECTIVE investors that just because an issuers "shares/counterfeit electronic book entries" are "trading" at 10% of book value doesn't make it a safe investment as 2% of book value might be around the corner after a few million more nonexistent entities, counterfeit "shares" if you will, are sold.

3) Immediately turn over this irrefutable evidence of these massive ongoing frauds to the Department of Justice and the proper States Attorneys General as per the law. Let them know the identity of the clearing firms and broker/dealers involved. Let the Ontario Securities Commission and the British Columbia Securities Commission know the identity of the Canadian brokerage firms involved.

4) Contact the victim companies and let them know of your findings and route them to the proper authorities to address these crimes. Warn them that the integrity of all past dividend distributions, rights offerings, shareholder votes, etc. have been severely compromised and perhaps should be immediately redressed. The intentional stuffing of ballot boxes via the sale of "counterfeit" voting rights to coconspirators is a very easy way to accomplish a hostile tender offer or to take over a victim company that just wouldn't die on cue after a "bear raid".

5) Contact the shareholders of the victim companies and inform them that your research has identified them as a victim to, at a minimum, securities fraud and make them aware of any rights they are entitled to. Warn the shareholders that they may have difficulty receiving any share certificates that they demand the delivery of. Pay particular attention to shareholders that held shares in "street name" during any dividend distribution.

6) Please contact the Congressional overseers of the SEC and make them aware of the financial fraud that you have uncovered and perhaps offer them an estimation of the damage to U.S. investors already incurred historically and currently "on the books".

7) Since the link between offshore naked short selling activity and the money laundering of funds destined for terrorist activity has recently become delineated, please follow the parameters set up in the USA Patriot Act to report this activity to the Office of Homeland

more...

[fastwalker]

Security.

8) Please contact the auditors of these victim companies and ask them to re-file audited financials with a corrected Shareholder Equity portion of the balance sheet as their current efforts are obviously misleading to any prospective investor. Please also contact the Federal Accounting Standards Board (FASB) as the GAAP standards have obviously not been met. The FASB will have to somehow figure out how to properly account for something as nebulous as a "counterfeit electronic book entry" should the SEC fail to order the buy-in of these illegal entities. This ought to be interesting!

9) Please contact the Transfer Agents of these issuers and have them re-file all of their regulatory filings, which are obviously in error. If the arithmetical sum of the legitimate shares plus the "counterfeit" shares exceeds the authorized number of shares as per the Articles of Incorporation, then the Secretary of States' office in the state of domicile should be contacted and brought up to speed as Revised State Statutes might have to be amended to prevent the issuing company from being liable for these transgressions. The Federal Rules and Regulations addressing the activities of Transfer Agents will obviously have to be rewritten to accommodate the existence of a plethora of counterfeit electronic book entries within the system.

10) Please contact the Secretary of State's offices in the state of domicile of the corporate issuers that have been victimized, and have them change their records as to the number of shares issued and outstanding and the reasons for any excesses over the legal number of authorized shares.

11) Please contact the brokerage firms hosting the shares of these issuers and warn them that there are significant discrepancies in the share counts of these issuers, the shareholders of which they owe a fiduciary duty. Have them warn their clients owning shares of issuers on these "restricted lists" that their monthly brokerage statements may have been seriously flawed as well as their purchase confirmations that arrived in the U.S. mail.

12) Please contact the FBI and the U.S. Attorneys, we suggest in New York, and tell them of your findings and the possible RICO implications therein.

13) Please contact the States Securities Regulators of each state of residence of any shareholder of an issuer on these "restricted lists".

14) Please contact the IRS and inform them of what you have detected. Ask them to contact the shareholders involved to make them aware of the tax write offs available to investors that are victims of fraud. The IRS would probably be very interested in any taxes evaded in these schemes.

15) Please advise the victim corporations that they should contact their creditors to warn them that the facts regarding share capitalization that they may have relied upon before loaning any money were seriously flawed and that these financings may have to be legally "undone" due to certain state banking statutes. Inform these issuers that any votes regarding tender offers may have to be re-taken and the resultant mergers and acquisitions may have to be legally "undone".

16) Please warn the DTCC that the terms of Addendum C to their rules and regulations JUST MIGHT BE being abused by those wishing ill upon U.S. micro cap investors.

17) The New York State Banking Commission might be given a "heads up" as to your findings so that their monitoring of the DTCC's activities might become more efficient. After all, the DTCC was set up as a Limited Purpose Trust Company under the banking laws of the State of New York.

more...

[fastwalker]

18) The Congressional legislators might be notified that a massive re-write of the 1934 Securities Exchange Act might be in order since all of these counterfeit electronic book entries in the system totally undermine this body of work. Apparently Congress at the time did not foresee or address the possibility that massive amounts of counterfeit electronic book entries within the system would nullify their efforts to hold certain Wall Street "professionals" accountable for their actions. Hundreds and hundreds of rules and regulations will need to be modified to accommodate counterfeit electronic book entries allowed to coexist in an undetected fashion next to legitimate shares.

19) Also warn the shareholders of these victim corporations that the officers and directors of their invested in company often feel "handcuffed" by the massive dilution caused by these counterfeit shares. Selling legitimate shares at artificially low levels becomes astronomically dilutive yet the monthly "burn rate" must be paid. Warn them that the weight of all of the "counterfeit" shares in the system on the shoulders of the victim corporation often proves to be too much for a development stage company in its OTCBB or Pink Sheet "incubator".

20) The share certificates of issuers on these "restricted lists" should definitely have a warning legend that will differentiate it from the shares of other issuers not needing the protection of the Rule 11830 parameters.

21) The trading symbols of restricted issues should perhaps have an extra identifying marker/modifier, perhaps a 5th digit, to call special attention to these issues, as history has proven quite clearly that the long term prognosis for issuers with large naked short positions UNADDRESSED BY THE REULATORS is "guarded" at best and usually TERMINAL.

22) All Rule 13 (d) and 16 (a) filings over the last 10 years should be reviewed to ascertain whether or not these "affiliates" really do own either 5 or 10% of a victim company's shares since the rule doesn't address whether the government is referring to the ownership of legitimate shares, counterfeit electronic book entries, or the arithmetical sum of the two. Any fines levied for 13 (d) or 16 (a) violations would obviously have to be reviewed and those fined would have to be contacted regarding their rights to appeal those fines.

OR

You can definitively address the problem once and for all as mandated by the '34 Exchange Act via buy-ins and then level up the playing field for the future so that the American micro cap investors never have to go through this again!

On the front page of the 12/24/03 edition of the Wall Street Journal, was an article entitled, "Missed chances: Behind SEC's Failings: Caution, Tight Budget, '90s Exuberance". In the article SEC Chairman Donaldson was quoted as saying, "For too long the commission has found itself in a position of reacting to market problems rather than anticipating them".

The WSJ reporters Mark Maremont and Deborah Solomon, ask the question, "Most importantly, why did the SEC fail to spot almost every major financial scandal in recent years-from improper fund trading to research analysts' conflicts of interest to favoritism in doling out coveted shares in initial public offerings?" The answer suggested was that the SEC acted as a timid, poorly managed bureaucracy at a time when frauds were becoming more complex. Congressional "stinginess" was also cited as contributory.

The authors continue, "Yet even SEC officials acknowledge the agency is due a good measure of criticism. Earlier this year, SEC staffers and McKinsey and Co. Consultants produced a 270-page catalog of the agency's weaknesses, commissioned by ex-chairman Harvey Pitt. The report, whose findings haven't been publicly disclosed, depicts an overly cautious agency hampered by bureaucratic inefficiencies and problems in monitoring a fast-changing industry. Chief among the flaws is a "reactive" culture that often fails to identify danger ahead of time, leaving the agency to respond after others expose problems. As the authors (of the study) put it, the SEC lacks the institutional structure and experience needed to systematically identify risks."

The article continues, "The SEC doesn't like to set hard and fast rules," says Roy Weitz, founder of FundAlarm.com which tracks the fund industry. "They feel that it's not fair to the industry and they don't want to go out on a limb. THE ISSUES GET RAISED.......AND FLOAT AROUND FOREVER."

more..

[fastwalker]

The article goes on, "The SEC is taking steps to fix other shortcomings. It says it is emphasizing real-time enforcement in major cases instead of dragging them out for years, a change Mr. Pitt pushed. It is establishing an Office of Risk Assessment to try to spot boulders in the rapids ahead. Newly hired enforcement attorneys will be dispatched with examiners to learn more about the industries they police. And a new staff squad will review all examination reports that raise enforcement issues to see why the issues weren't pursued, agent officials say. Too little effort had been put into "attempts to identify current risks and prioritize those risks", according to Mr. Donaldson. He wants examiners to be "more focused in on where the real problems are, as opposed to a checklist approach in playing 'gotcha' with inspections."

I feel that this article hit the nail on the head as it pertains to the SEC's historical approach to the massive fraud referred to as "naked short selling". Working at the SEC for relatively meager wages is often seen as a launching platform for a more lucrative career on Wall Street. The mantra for many employees naturally becomes "Don't ruffle any of the feathers of possible future employers". My message to the SEC would be to quit worrying about what "the industry" might think. "The industry" is beating the "you know what" out of the micro cap investors. You are the regulators of "the industry". YOU ARE THE ONLY COPS! You're not going "out on a limb" by performing the duties that Congress mandated and empowered you to do. Don't let this issue of naked short selling, "get raised and floated around forever" any longer, been there done that. In 1999, 2,700 of us took time out of our lives to plead for your intervention in this matter. I believe this might have been an all-time record response to an "SEC Concept Release". Here we are nearly 5 years later back on your doorstep, in fact, we never did really leave your doorstep.

It is way too late for you to be "proactive" in this fraud. The best you can do now is to be "reactive" to the fraud which you often get criticized for but this is a whole lot better than being "inactive" in regards to this naked short selling fraud any longer.

Mr. Katz, I hope you can sense the frustration levels of the American micro cap investors. Since naked short selling is a particularly heinous version of a securities fraud that deals with the integrity of the unit of equity ownership of a "U.S. Corporation", something we refer to as a "share", the ramifications of this fraud are very far reaching for the integrity of the public markets trading these "shares". Please tighten up the loopholes in the proposed Regulation SHO especially involving the immediate buy-in of these open positions and also the applicability of the Rule 11830 parameters of protection to victim companies not yet able to become fully reporting as well as reporting companies.

Sincerely,

Dr. Jim DeCosta

[fastwalker]

This is not me..FW

Well here it is, my first post about a communication with Andy. I put my follow-up email to him first, to explain that I did request his permission to post his email replies to me (a proper thing to do).
_______________
John wrote:
May I have your permission to post this please, as it supports my rhetoric to this group of people. And although it doesn't come in the form of a PR, it should carry an equal weight as compared to the other rhetoric being posted.
John

From: Andrew Hill [mailto:[e-mail]]
Sent: Monday, April 18, 2005 2:02 PM
To: John
Subject: RE: 99.9% message board "stuff" not to be believed

Certainly. My role as the contact person for CMKX, aside from official filings and pr's, is to offer clarification to all shareholders. Therefore, my responses to shareholders should be considered representative of CMKX management's opinion on any clarifications I provide.
____________________________________

John wrote:

The reason I'm writing to you is to ask if there is ANY way Mr. Casavant and/or the legal team will permit SOME sort of press release to shareholders, repeating what you are reported to have said on the message boards. (in regard to the idea of not to believe 99.9% of information/rumors posted)

There are people becoming slanderous of you and Mr. Casavant. A small group of the message board members have even gone so far as to hire a personal injury lawyer to shadow our corporate attorneys to the SEC hearings, as if to say this new lawyer is better able to look out for the interests of the shareholders.

(personal comment)

I'm not asking for the share structure, or valuation, or drilling/mining status - HONEST! All I need to hear is an official PR statement, reiterating the things being written on the message boards. This would provide consistency to the word already released, that nothing should be believed unless it is in the form of a PR.

Does the corporate legal team of CMKX welcome the efforts of Mr.. Frizzell? Is there indeed a plan of action that CMKX will follow regardless of how the SEC hearing falls? Are there official words of confidence that Mr. Casavant can share with us via a PR, that we can show to the message boards and say HERE are the official words of our company!

This last weekend on the message board was very discouraging, and I am afraid that the groups bashing the company are going to get the upper hand. My personal belief is that Mr.. Frizzell is part of the organized effort to bring down CMKX.

Please help a LOT of people maintain their high level of support for our company. Please ask Mr. Casavant for an official word that can be released in a PR, for ALL of us to believe. Make it as unambiguous as you can, because there are some who take great pride in dissecting every word, every nuance, to develop their own spin.

Thanks in advance for your time and effort in this most important matter. Do not reveal anything which would jeopardize our current level of corporate security, but please don't say nothing "officially" in a PR. I fear that at this point, "no comment" is being seen as a very negative thing for the shareholders to see or hear.

Thanks again.

John
s/32

[fastwalker]

From: Andrew Hill [mailto:[e-mail]]
Sent: Monday, April 18, 2005 1:27 PM
To: John
Subject: Re: 99.9% message board "stuff" not to be believed


Hi John...

Thanks for your email. If you refer and contain yourself to the PR's issued so far in 2005, there has been alot of valuable information released by CMKX management. That is why I implore all shareholders to ignore all rumors and speculation on message boards and chat rooms.

Not only is most of the info. in these forums incorrect or misleading, 90% of all CMKX shareholders will never read or participate in them. These shareholders are the silent majority who never waste their time paying any attention to it and choose instead to wait for CMKX to speak in an official manner.

CMKX is preparing for a hearing with the SEC now set for May 10th in L.A. Until the company advises otherwise this is the current reality.

As to Mr. Frizzell, CMKX offers no public opinion as to whether shareholders should or should not spend their own $25. It must be left up to the individual.

BTW...neither Mr. Williams nor Mr. Dhonau have any official capacity with CMKX. Neither of them are Officers or Directors at this time and any statements made by either of them over the weekend in Vegas (ie Paltalk comments) should be considered their own personal opinion as private citizens.

Best regards and thank you for your continued support of Mr. Casavant and TEAM.

Andy

_______________

My specific questions were not answered, however, he did make a few rather pointed statements, which I for one will consider actionable.

My speculation: I hope we may see more "official" PR information, regarding lesser activities to dispell the rumor-mongering. I think the discussions as reported via Paltalk are properly put into perspective. I also think the Frizzell issue now becomes a non-debate issue, not worthy of tout or rebutt.

I just hope in this feeble attempt of mine to get a grip on some semblance of reality is not seen as "empty words". Andy didn't mince words, and I see little room for further speculation.

john