Bourque Industries Inc (BORK)

[gotmilk]

"... insiders under oath ... we might just get a tid-bit of truthful information for once."

RockQQ's post, which can be accessed from my 12/19/11 post of #msg-70102759 is a clear indicator of a trusted poster to "tell it as it is" without any agenda fueled by drinking either the milk or kool-aid.

Its laughable, where any sound made carries with it those vibrations of disgust, when one confronted John Bourque directly a few months ago, after he returned to Bourque Industries of this year, and pointed out the woeful plight measured in lost investment that all of those that committed capital in order to gain a financial return from investing in the 2011 BAM (Bourque Alloys Manufacturing) offering to receive a song & dance from John Bourque that included John Bourque's reply that the money this private company obtained from the BAM investors was "lost" rather than speak the truth that it was a scam to obtain both cash and BORK shares for those that created "on paper only" having no assets of value, just printed out of thin air BAM shares.

Add to that John Bourque giving knowingly false legal "encouragement" to this BAM investor that both he and CJ Condon are of the opinion that there will be some 'help' from Bourque Industries for those investors. That has been debunked years ago by the simple identification that those BAM investors conducted no agreements with public company Bourque Industries, but with the private company Bourque Alloys Manufacturing that had zero connections business wise (legally) with Bourque Industries. Meaning any "help" can not arrive from Bourque Industries, but only by those persons that ran the BAM offering. To do so by any activity of Bourque Industries violates the legal definitions of company officers to protect the shareholders simply because those that engaged the BAM offering conducted activity totally separate from Bourque Industries involvement. As I already posted, those of the BAM offering signed a legal document stating that they accept all outcomes of the offering. Here the only recourse would be to prove in court criminal intent of the BAM offering which involves those that offered it, not Bourque Industries.

As most posted in 2011-2012 "bad management" was the cause, but really...

Failure to do so changes bad judgments to "intent to defraud." - Doug