Register for free to join our community of investors and share your ideas. You will also get access to streaming quotes, interactive charts, trades, portfolio, live options flow and more tools.
Register for free to join our community of investors and share your ideas. You will also get access to streaming quotes, interactive charts, trades, portfolio, live options flow and more tools.
lmorovan:
Could you be so kind as to let this CDEX relevant discussion between diddy and I be just that.
Diddy has asked me countless questions, over and over again.
Not once did you tell diddy to bring it to the board and discuss it, NOT ONCE. Diddy was never asked by you to post the answers to the questions he was asking!
Nor did you tell diddy to " bring it on, or let it go "
You are being "selective again", please try and be fair. Treat "all" the same.
If you are not able, RESIGN!
Crow3:
" I like it much better here, even though I don't get to cuss as much as I did there."
Now there is a high standard, for sure.
Crow3:
NO spark of truthfulness from either of you two on this subject. You two claimed she was part of a gang, she told you she was not. You two were not truthful.
Sassy came forth and said, she, and she alone, submitted toss to rb, if she felt it appropiate. RB would look at her request, and toss or not toss.
Once again the truth was provided by Sassy, not from either of you.
Imagine that.
d4diddy:
"You claimed that CDEx discovered it and it is the truly unique aspect of CDEX's work.
You claimed that CDEx revealed it, not you."
Whatever you want to say diddy. It is always that way with you and a few others.
What I have said, I have said it because I believe it to be factual, based on what I have read and understood.
You try and spin it, to be something it is not. First you want it to come from someone else, so you say that, then you want it to come from some patent, then you say that, then you want it to be a stated fact, so you say that, so which ever the way the wind blows is how you say it.
As I have said before, the bottom line is SIMPLE.
I have offered to put you in front of anyone at CDEX that you have butchered on this board. The truth is, you simply lack the character to go to the CDEX office, and be upfront about the lies you have posted on this board.
The absolute facts that separarte you and me, is that I have asked the questions, face to face, I have met most of the people involved. I have taken the time to get to know them, and some of their families.
Some have earned the questiom mark beside their name (lh), while others have earned my deepest respect. You know nothing of the CDEX men you butcher on this board.
Now, lets to get back to what you wrote on September 17, 2004. Lets look at the kind of person YOU truly are. Post what you wrote and sent that day, so all can see what you are truly about.
ote
Sassy:
They flatter themselves at being banned from boards. They want to think that it has to be a conspiracy, when in fact, it is only a few good people reporting the continued trash spued by a few.
You know the old saying gargage in, gargage out. Kinda like a jail cell, they just cannot get away from each other, only transferred from one holding place to another.
And of course, they cry the same old thing, but I was innocent, I did not do anything. Some things Sassy and some people are just destined to be deviants, otherwise, quite few lawyers would be seeking work.
Crow3:
Some over, imho, just gonna wish all that happened to'em, was to be exiled from another board.
And I ain't talkin about no physical stuff. That stuff heals in a day or two. So don't go thinkin I be threaten anyone.
sandpenny:
And you wonder why some have to hunt for places to post.
rottenapple:
Well, there you go again, showing just how much you don't know. There are just times that I am not around. Thus, whatever was discussed during that time, I don't go back and read.
Much like a soap opera, one can be gone from these boards for awhile, and miss a bit of yack, but the theme remains the same. You have your losers, whiners, twisters, and liars, along with your winners, laughers, factors, and truism's.
As I said rotten, I DON"T know diamonddave from you. Just the truth, which is something you cannot believe, that's for sure.
Crow3:
Maybe, you best just forget this matter as well.
There are negative things to be said on other subjects, so pick one.
Last bye
rottenapple:
September 17, 2004, not 1954, and not something that one would forget about either.
" Like you, rather than insinuate BS, if you got it, post it!"
Maybe you best just ignore this subject, it has gotten to you.
Afterall, it is not about you, is it.
Bye again
rottenapple:
I have not even read the term "gang tos" until this moment. So you are talking about an area, I know nothing of.
I have heard of diamonddave, but I do not know him.
There is a thought about what you said in your post( "who said anything negative," ).
I have had this discussion with scarednomore a time or two, and I do believe it to be a higher standard that some just never get.
I have noticed through the years of being on this earth, that when one of my classmates became negative and disruptive during class, they were removed from the class room. As I got a little older and began to play sports, I noticed that those who were negative and ran down others, were cut from the team. As my college days came, I noticed that if a faturnity buddy became negative and had not anything good to say, he was black balled from the club.
As I started working for companies, I noticed that employees who had nothing but negative things to say about their company, did not last long with the company.
And I have noticed through the years, that one or two of my old high school buds, who became negative thinkers, and complainers, found themselves with each other, and no one else. A pretty miserable bunch of people.
I guess I do not find it a surprise that people who find mostly negative things to say about others, often get asked to leave, or, they get fired, or tossed out.
To this day, I have never seen one person, friend, family member, or employee fired on the grounds that he or she were just to positive about being in the surroundings they are in.
I cannot count the times I have heard people say how much they like someone because of their positive attitude about life and people.
And there is a HUGE difference of occasionly saying something negative, versus making your theme to be negative.
Oh well, I am not preaching to the band on this one, and I am quite sure all the above matters not to many of you.
Bye
Crow3:
And you ain't really read what I wrote either.
Please pay attention.
Crow3:
Did I ever say for him to post a "post" he wrote?
No, would be the answer.
I said for him to post on this board what he wrote on that day.
Quit twisting the words of my post.
d4diddy:
I am expressing my thoughts of what I have read. If and when you have the time to read any and all patents you can regarding " detectable by x-ray fluorescence ", and take 33 pages of specific notes, you may or may not come to the same conclusion I have.
You are trying to twist words into my mouth again. The wording of patents are unique in their language, or you get it returned with a letter telling you to try again.
I draw my conclusions from what I have read, or maybe I should say in most cases, what I have not read in other patents.
If my conclusions prove to be wrong, so be it. I have certainly read plenty of your conclusions.
I have no idea if ELF worked utilizing this same principle. But I will have to say, to think that CDEX has not vastly improved the science behind all of its applications, would be to be with ones head in the sand.
I would like for you to post what you wrote September 17, 2004 at 11:59am.
T I A
rottenapple:
(ot) I think that a few others are going to find some very similar outcomes.
However, I do not see anything funny about it. I know it all could have been avoided.
Crow3:
The ihub may or may not be more honest. We will know just how honest they are before long.
rottenapple:
Which alias should we put first?
stormyday11, mike2999, rottenapple, or one of the other alias's?
Sorry, but after your very cheap shots at Dr. Poteet, I thought a little reminder of your many past alias's would okay. I did not list all of them, just enough to make a point.
At least he did not opt out on the shareholders. He has remained at the lab and has continued to work as hard and as long as it takes, to get CDEX to the next level. Once again, you poke fun and talk down about a man you don't even know. He has not one time poked fun at you, or trashed talked you, or treated you with any disrespect.
Yet, look at what you have said about him and his work.
I do not understand.
INET6:
You could be right.
sanddollar:
I hate to hear about your pipes freezing. I have been in a home without heat before, it makes you realize just how lucky most folks are.
I am not real sure why some of you have not looked at the price of CDEX during the 30 cent offer you keep talking about.
Dec-04 0.46 1.93 0.46 1.17 77,086 1.17
Nov-04 0.40 0.50 0.38 0.48 23,938 0.48
Oct-04 0.39 0.57 0.38 0.41 18,576 0.41
Sep-04 0.45 0.75 0.35 0.40 14,976 0.40
Plus, I know that some ppers that turned down the 30 cent offer! It makes a big difference when one can actually know more of the facts.
A big difference.
rottenapple:
Well, I think a little common sense tells us, that very few hospitals will have 20 units in them.
One of the most obvious differences that has been clear for some time, is how conservative CDEX is as compared to Loch.
But, when one stops and considers what Loch Harris did to all of us, including MP and others, I understand why caution has probably been a bit overdone.
I suspect, that our new CEO and BOD, will be a bit more forward thinking. Then again, the hardest part of the CDEX comeback is now in the books. Malcolm no doubt bit off a lot more than he ever dreamed of. I for one, appreciate him NOT giving up or walking away before he had assembled the very talented and educated team that is now in place.
I agree with you about how the number of units could play a significant role in whether investors flock to CDEX, or run the other way.
Sassy:
Yes, he thinks deleting the truth keeps it fom being known. He has deleted 4 or 5 of my post already today, not one of them violated anything on this board of rules.
I guess when Loch Harris, Cdex, the Court, the Judge, the attorneys, the shareholders, the SEC , and MP all turn you down because of the untruths you have said, it makes you want to not have to deal with it.
CDEX has gone forward at every turn. He never thought CDEX would be where it is today.
CDEX has proven him wrong time in and time out, over and over. As as any poster that I can recall that went toe to toe with him.
The inet6 thing was such a joke, some of the guys brought it up at breakfast this moring. I did not think the laughter was ever going to stop.
rottenapple:
I believe Raiderman, because with each passing year, CDEX has moved a step or two closer to sales.
To some, the movement has been to slow, to others, it has allowed them to average down, yet, to others, it has put them through continued grief, because CDEX keeps moving forward.
I am not sure why you would call his post bs, when you have others still posting, who have said this company would never go public, then they said, there would never be a stock price, and if there was as a stock price, it would be 5 or 10 cents, they said the SEC would get MP and WP, and shut down CDEX, yet, they were wrong on every point, and you don't refer to their post as bs. Why not? Their post really were bs.
I think all of us have felt from time to time, that our investment seems to be blowing in the wind. But gone? No, I don't feel it is gone.
The press release said Baxa had to buy x amount of units to keep their exclusive contract. If you are Baxa and I am Valimed, and you wanted an exclusive for your area's, then you must like what you see. If I am going to give you an exclusive, I am going to require you to buy x amount of units. You need to write me a check for your units, and then I will build them. Whether you sale them or lease them, is your ( baxa'S ) deal.
In order for the manufacture to bid on getting the job, I would say they would have to know "all" aspects of the requirements to make the unit. Which tells me, CDEX is ready for manufacturing, and the delivering of the units that Baxa has paid for.
Inet6:
I really think two of them are seeing what is coming, the others are just out to act the way they feel about themselves.
Every post is a direct relection of how they wake up each day. When one has no self esteem, because one has very little character, it causes one to belittle things around them.
Bashing others, gives them a false self worth, but in their heads it is them against the world, they feel important.
rottenapple:
Maybe Raiderman is doing what a few others have said concerning the manufacturing annoucement.
CDEX has piked a manufacturing company, and one might think that though the news is out today, the homework was completed a while back.
Because CDEX has signed a manufacturing company, one might think CDEX has revenues to pay for manufacturing.
I can see why raiderman feels that revenues could be increasing.
It is real clear that CDEX is continuing to go right up the ladder.
d4diddy:
Sorry, you have gotton beyond that which I can even give an opinion on.
But you know what, you are doing a really good job.
May I suggest you just keep educating us.
And could you post what you wrote September 17, 2004.
tia
d4diddy:
Please post what you wrote on September 17, 2004.
tia and eomypollls
rottenapple:
A safe place to be for many of us at different times.
One might think that some if not most, and maybe in some cases all, who invest investment dollars in companies, will actually do some serious DD.
As I have said before, if my risked dollars prove to be put into a common tech, I stand to lose my investment.
I have read enough material, and researched enough documents to fill 12 dozen gone with the wind books.
I believe strongly in the men behind CDEX's tech, and the future of CDEX.
I have not threatened by phone, by post, by mail or by email one single person because I don't like them, or because of what they post or EMAIL.
d4diddy:
I do not believe that I stated that I read what I wrote concerning my thoughts on CDEX's tech in a patent.
What I did say was that from all the patents I have read, that it appears to me that CDEX has a unique discovery that I have not found in any other patent.
Having read all the papers on the web page concerning CDEX(s) tech, as well as many other public documents, including patents, I draw my own conclusion that certain co-existing materials can be detected by xray and are present in all explosives manufactured today.
You try so hard to manufacture something from the air.
But I do have an important question to ask you, can you post what you wrote September 17, 2004 on this board.
tia
d4diddy:
As I said to you earlier, I have read the patent applications diddy.
In fact, I have read 45 to 50 patent applications along the lines of the CDEX application.
What I noticed is that no other patent application I have read shares the same view that I gave my thoughts on.
Please do contact CDEX concerning any matter you wish, I have asked you forth right to meet me there several times in person.
Have you figured out why, or is it you have figured out why and do not want to meet me there.
When would you like to go?
rottenapple:
Let us hope so.
Which is why we stay tuned in order to bring the order that is needed.
You know, and so does diddy and crow, that Baker and Boone cannot dissolve CDEX, yet you just sit back and let poor ole lmorovan make a fool of himself.
Why is that?
rottenapple:
You are free to think that.
If I were standing where you are, what choice would I have, but to say that same thing.
lmorovan:
When something goes from the same hand to the other hand, you don't walk away from:
"2.1. NO LIABILITIES TO BE ASSUMED. As used in this Agreement, the term
"Liability shall mean and include any direct or indirect indebtedness, guaranty,
endorsement, claim, loss, damage, deficiency, cost, expense, penalty, obligation
or responsibility, fixed or unfixed, known or unknown, asserted or unasserted,
liquidated or unliquidated, secured or unsecured. Buyer is not assuming and
shall not assume or perform or discharge any Liability of Company, and all such
Liabilities shall be and remain the responsibility of Company, expressly
including but not limited to (i) any and all Liabilities in relation to any
agreement between Company and Henry Blair or any person or entity affiliated
with Henry Blair (Henry Blair and any person or entity affiliated with Henry
Blair shall be referred to herein collectively as the "Blair Affiliates"); (ii)
lmorovan:
Jusy more of what you just don't know:
"and (iii) any and all research, development, manufacture,
production, marketing, distribution, exploitation, use, and sale of any and all
proprietary technologies, processes and related products in all fields of use in
which Wade Poteet, Harold Cauthen, and Henry Blair, acting as independent
contractors for Company and the Operations Team as defined in the June 1, 2001
Agreement with Loch Harris had been performing for Company at any time."
dubyah:
Yes you are correct.
He has magic emails as well.
lmorovan:
The court has ruled on the dissolment of Loch Harris.
"Loch will be dissolved promptly after the share exchange pursuant to the judicial reorganization / sale, so the individual defendants will necessarily cease the activities that plaintiffs alleged constituted a continuing breach of fiduciary duty and waste. A liquidator will be appointed to dispose of the company's remaining property, with the potential of a final distribution to the former shareholders who participated in the share exchange and class members who opted out."
You are so out to lunch, but then again, is that surprise.
rottenapple:
There are is a lot of misinformation that needs to be collected.
lmorovan:
I asked a much higher and more knowledgable source than Baker or Boone!
And I did that years ago.
lmorovan:
The only way that CDEX Inc can go away, is for the CDEX board to recommend that to the shareholders.
Then there has to be a super majority vote in favor of dissolvement.
You are so lost on this subject, that even your little ghost rider is clueless.
lmorovan:
Does Diddy, Sanddollar, Xenophon and Crow believe that Boone and or Baker can dissolve CDEX at will.
lmorovan:
????
In your world lmorovan.