fishincanuck -- I have been logged on

all day (server #3) and have not had any delays at all.

Chech which server you are logged in to and perhaps sign out and then log back on. Perhaps if you log onto a different server the problem may go away.

That is just a guess -- it would take one of the puter brains to give a definitive answer.

Good luck . . .

OK< OK -- lordwinmore and Crooner --

I can set you both straight as I have, at one time or another, been on the side that each of you currently sits on. I speak from experience so I feel free to point out the following:

1. You cannot force your position(s) and expect to win as

IHUB is a business which you avail yourselves of as either a free or paying member. As such you agree to their rules (TOUs). You must realize that it is their "ball" you are using and that they have the right to take it away/deny your further use of it or, at their discretion, change the rules as they wish at any time.

2. Either of you can choose to attack the other and will be subject to sanctions ranging from being banned for a short term all the way to "getting the boot" (loss of membership).

3. Feeling that you have been attacked you then foolishly believe that you have the "right" to "tit for tat" attack response. FORGET IT -- "tit for tat" DOES NOT EXIST. Doing this simply puts you in the same boat to be sanctioned as the one who started the pissing contest.

The only sensible action open to you is to TOS any such attack posts and/or, if that does not work, contact an IH/Admin with a PM, telling them of the ongoing problem and asking for their help/attention.

Above all you must realize that if you attempt to strong arm either other posters, mods or IH Admins -- YOU WILL LOSE.

It is as simple as that -- YOU WILL LOSE.

Be smarter than I was and, if attacked by others, do not respond -- TOS abusive posts/posters and ask for help from Admins.

FRED -- Drummerman --

Many thanks to both of you . . .

Hello -- I just found this board today --

I love it. Thanks to all who provide the links to videos and music.

A favor, please. If anyone has a link to an "OLD" one. I believe the name was "Sweet Lorraine" and the group was The Knockouts.

There is a story behind it. I was listening to NYC disk jockey Alan Freed (always did) as a kid. He was coming up to a break and had something like 40-45 seconds to fill and he grabbed a "promo" disk -- Sweet Lorraine" -- played it for a little under 40 seconds and in less than 48 hours it was a smash. The group may have continued to record but I don't think they ever had another success to match this one.

Any help would be appreciated.

Phil -- when the Administrator is clearly prejudiced and biased against you where else do you go?

Phil -- that individual is

prejudiced and biased which is why I addressed my post/question to Bob.

Thanks . . .

Bob -- a question for you please --

I have been away from my computer for about 2 hours and just went to the GTEM board and I found that I have been "banned until further notice". I would like to know why. Thank you

"However, a birdie tells me

Vargas has turned states evidence against Joe.

This should not be a surprise."


That does not "surprise" me at all. This is exactly what I have been saying all along -- the smaller fish (guppies) "turn states evidence" on those above them (the "keepers").

Now, if what your "birdie" told you turns out to be true then that "birdie" should be considering a different nest for himself as it may now be time for Monterosso to "turn states evidence". Perhaps that would be considered to "putting salt on that 'birdies' tail"?

As I posted earlier, anyone/EVERYONE found to be guilty of transgressions -- Monterosso, Offices and Directors (past and present), employees and any other individuals (perhaps Taboada???) -- should have their feet held to the fire and should have to pay the piper, in both the civil and criminal venues.

A question to the board --

What exactly is the "TAO group"?????

"Who" exactly is the "TAO group"?????

Can ANYONE show any actual saleable products/technologies from the "TAO group"?????

Can anyone shed any light on what products/technologies the "TAO group" has that could, in any way, be financially beneficial?????

Can anyone provide links which can/will provide any usable DD regarding "TAO group"?????

What proof is there to show that the "TAO group" is a valid, ongoing enterprise?????

What is there to prove that the "TAO group" is any different from the 50 to 100 previous GTEM(Wells Notice) failed connections of the past?????

Any reasonable, informative responses would be welcomed.

"Also, even if it can be trusted

as an authentic document, does it not represent the insurance company's side of the story in order to back up a position they may have wished to take with respect to limiting their liabilities? Wouldn't you wish to hear the other side of the story before using it in the way you have, or don't you care about that?"

pokestake, have you read the entire document? In case you haven't, here it is:

http://ihump-gtem.googlegroups.com/web/Admiral-ltr-to-leinwand.pdf

pokestake, I have read the entire document and, based upon what is there -- the time sequence(s) and (mis)statements appear clear -- it is my "opinion" that Lienwand, among others, intentionally lied/misrepresented in the mentioned insurance application.

pokestake, regarding Monterosso, I could care less what happens to him. If he is guilty then they should fine/penalize him as much as possible. If he is found guilty and the DOJ is involved then I would have no problem with prison time. If guilty then Monterosso should pay the piper.

But, does being guilty of what he is charged with make everything he says untrue? -- I don't think so.

Does being guilty of what he is charged with make everything -- all documents and records he possesses false? -- I don't think so.

I think, my "opinion", that there is much much more yet to see the light of day and I believe that there will be many more Officers, managers, Directors who will, in the relatively near future, have charges levied against them and have to face the bar of justice.

I hope each and every one of them pays the piper to the fullest extent.

"AS the current CEO,

I believe Jon is really attempting to pull our nuts out of the fire and make GTEM a go of it."


I wonder, does his valiant attempt include giving "misleading" responses on the application for insurance coverage?

I believe that the nuts "in the fire" you mentioned are much more personal to "Jon".

"However, a birdie tells me

Vargas has turned states evidence against Joe."

Please, exactly what did Jon and/or Rob (the "birdies") have to say on this matter?

Cole -- Did you ever get any answers?????

Posted by: ColeThornton
In reply to: Pagan who wrote msg# 94153
Date:11/24/2007 4:14:21 PM
Post #94158 of 94307

Pagan, why did you say...

"you posted "The addition of the 2A to TAO's and Sanswire's" arsenal."

When, I didn't post that at all!

This is "EXACTLY" what I posted...

"The addition of the 2A to TAO's and Sanswire's current scheduled flight plans rounds out GlobeTel's atmospheric arsenal of low to medium to high altitude platforms."

Was it your "intention" to take the part of the quote about "scheduled flight plans" and mislead the board into thinking the part about the "arsenal" referred to TAO and Sanswire? Because if you read the quote, and don't "missquote" me, you can clearly see it says... "GlobeTel's" atmospheric arsenal and "not" TAO and GlobeTel's arsenal.

Since you ask...

"Please tell us the inventory of airship prototypes TAO is in possession of."

I have no idea, as it is "not" relevant to the point I was making. The point being that GlobeTel is once again being "OVERLY PROMOTIONAL" as to refer to one balloon/strat/whatever, in need of over haul, that has "never" accomplished "any" of the major goals set out for it as an "atmospheric arsenal". It's not only "OVERLY PROMOTIONAL"... it's funny as well!

You also said...

"Because according to your statement, where you said that was "overly promotional", you spoke with apparent authority on the issue as if you are fully versed on what TAO has in their possession."

Once again, as you "mistakenly" thought my original post was about TAO, it is irrelevant. "GlobeTel" is being "overly promotional" at the least when they speak of "their" atmospheric arsenal of low to medium to high altitude platforms.

IF THEY DON'T HAVE ONE, THEY CAN'T HAVE AN "ARSENAL" OF THEM!!!

Why did you ask...

"At your convenience, please post up a list of that inventory as related to TAO."

Once again, my post was about GlobeTel. Since the quote clearly said...

"GlobeTel's" atmospheric arsenal and "not" TAO and GlobeTel's arsenal.

Maybe "YOU" could post up a list of the items in "GlobeTel's" atmospheric arsenal of low to medium to high altitude platforms.

TIA

Thank you for

passing that along from "Jon" or "Rob".

If proven guilty then I would hope that Joe M and anyone/everyone, past/present, connected to/with GTEM(Wells Notice) guilty of participation in any/all illegal actions would be subject to the harshest punishment(s) available including as many years in prison as possible.

I believe that there have been many more Wells Notices issued than those which were sent to Joe M and GTEM.

Now that they, the SEC, has made it's move concerning Joe M and his Wells Notice I would expect that their, the SEC's, next move will be to take action regarding the Wells Notice issued to GTEM.

In an instance like this it is seldom one or two individuals who are guilty. It is more like a rotten onion -- peel away one rotten layer and all you find is another rotten layer, right down to the core.

Some FACTS about GTEM(Wells Notice):

1) A bank account of GTEM(Wells Notice) was recently garnished to satisfy a settlement.

2) GTEM(Wells Notice) is being sued by a former executive of the company.

3) GTEM(Wells Notice) is being sued by Wachovia National bank.

4) GTEM(Wells Notice) was delisted by the American Stock Exchange.

5) GTEM(Wells Notice) is being investigated by the SEC.

6) GTEM(Wells Notice) received a Well's Letter from the SEC, and so has a former executive from the company. The SEC says they may seek civil penalties and may revoke GTEM's registration (if this happens GTEM's(Wells Notice) shares would be banned from trading).

7) GTEM(Wells Notice) was evicted from their hangar in Palmdale, California.

8) GTEM(Wells Notice) was evicted from their offices in Pembroke Pines, Florida.

9) GTEM(Wells Notice) does not have a functioning commercial "Stratellite", "Skysat" or anything even close.

10) Globetel has several indebtness and other lawsuits pending against it, primarily in Florida.

11) GTEM(Wells Notice) short-lived German division is bankrupt and non-functional.

12) GTEM(Wells Notice) was sued by its shareholders (there is a "pending" settlement agreement for a "paltry" 2.3 million dollars to be paid by GTEM's(Wells Notice) insurance carrier).

13) GTEM(Wells Notice) has not only never been profitable this company, GTEM(Wells Notice), has "managed" to go from a market cap of approximately 450 MILLION DOLLARS to today's pathetic market cap of approximately 10 to 12 MILLION DOLLARS.

14) GTEM(Wells Notice) has not officially made public the number of customers its Mexican joint venture(NMC) has. Remember those "conservative" claims/projections made by GTEM(Wells Notice) -- the excuses for not achieving them will start soon. If GTEM(Wells Notice) follows their past practice they will blame everyone else and a grand conspiracy against them for the continuation of their failures.

More to come . . .

Should this be called progress or success???

GTEM(Wells Notice)/Sanswire has, over the years spent tens of millions of OUR dollars and, other than a 100 foot "FLOAT TEST" (as per Col. Murch, Project Director), has been nothing other than an open pit for dumping shareholder money.

GTEM(Wells Notice)/Sanswire has never "EARNED A SINGLE PENNY".

GTEM(Wells Notice) went from having millions of dollars to spend to having so little money that they could not pay their office rent. Their landlord achieved a judgment against GTEM(Wells Notice).

GTEM(Wells Notice) went from having millions of dollars to spend to having so little money that they could not pay their rent on space to house their "failed high altitude vehicle". -- Their landlord achieved a judgment against GTEM(Wells Notice).

GTEM(Wells Notice) forced their D & O insurance carrier to settle a class action suit against them for, as one poster put it, a "PALTRY" 2.3 MILLION DOLLARS.

GTEM(Wells Notice) CEO Jonathan Lienwand has been accused of making false statements/lies in an insurance application.

GTEM(Wells Notice) has gone from 65 employees to today's wonderful number of 7 employees. I guess to GTEM(Wells Notice) CEO Lienwand that is considered progress and success.

more to follow . . .

Could someone -- anyone --

PLEASE provide any available links which show/prove that GTEM(Wells Notice) and their subsidiary, Sanswire, have ever achieved any actual "FLIGHT" with one of their vehicles.

Floating a balloon on a 100 foot cord does not qualify as a "FLIGHT". Mr. Murch, the former much acclaimed head of the Sanswire project designated the balloon on a cord demonstration as a "FLOAT TEST" -- that does not qualify.

Again, anyone, PLEASE provide any available links which show/prove that GTEM(Wells Notice) and their subsidiary, Sanswire, have ever achieved any actual "FLIGHT" with one of their vehicles.

Thank you . . .

So far, that is the only

thing that GTEM(Wells Notice) has that is legitimately . . .

UP IN THE AIR

Telling the truth -- which is that

GTEM(Wells Notice) CEO Jonathan Leinwand intentionally LIED on the insurance application

is not bashing.

If you consider telling the truth to be bashing please show what that opinion is based on.

Thank you . . .

I apologize, I forgot to

include the link in the preceding post. Here it is:

http://ihump-gtem.googlegroups.com/web/Admiral-ltr-to-leinwand.pdf

It is an exceptionally revealing document.

Honesty, or the lack of, concerning

"Jon" Lienwand, CEO of GTEM(Wells Notice) is clearly shown in the following link. Read the entire letter and see, that they, the law firm of Wilson, Elser, Miskowitz, Edelman & Dicker LLP, in their letter addressed to Jonathan Lienwand, call GTEM's(Wells Notice) CEO Lienwand everything but a liar. They do state that he, Jonathan Lienwand, knowingly and intentionally misrepresented facts in the application for coverage from Carolina Casualty Insurance Company.

Among others who they claim made intentional misstatements were Tim Huff and Larry Lynch.

That shows the quality of management that GTEM(Wells Notice) had/has.

"How many prototypes does TAO currently have?"

Well, we know that GTEM(Wells Notice) has no arsenal at all so what makes you think that TAO has any?

Pagan, perhaps you could, "at your convenience", provide us with a list of their successes and exactly what is in their "arsenal".

It would be very much appreciated. That is, unless, you are making assumptions on your own?

It looks like --

GTEM(Wells Notice) and their wonderful "AnywhereCaller" program hit a bump in the road -- a competitor who actually has a product that is both for sale and WORKS.

Time Warner Cable offers the following to their customers who subscribe to their internet phone service. The cost for the international calling plan is an additional $19.95 per month.

All your international calls for one monthly rate

Connect with loved ones around the world every day

Call landline phones in more than 100 countries, including Mexico, Guatemala, the Dominican Republic, El Salvador, Peru, China, India, the Philippines, Germany and the United Kingdom. Call mobile phones in more than a dozen countries. See the full list of countries (see below).

Make international calling easier and less expensive than ever before. Forget calling cards!

International OnePrice? Calling Plan is available to customers who subscribe to any Digital Phone calling plan and Digital Cable and/or Road Runner High Speed Online. Offer valid for residential customers in Digital Phone serviceable areas.

International OnePrice provides customers with 3,000 minutes (50 hours) of calling time per month, based upon your monthly Time Warner Cable billing cycle. Time Warner Cable reserves the right to monitor usage for possible abuse of service. More than 3,000 minutes (50 hours) a month of retail use is considered beyond normal residential use and may be investigated, resulting in potential termination of service.


Landline Destinations Country Codes:

93 Afghanistan ................ 965 Kuwait
54 Argentina .................. 371 Latvia
297 Aruba ..................... 961 Lebanon
61 Australia .................. 352 Luxembourg
43 Austria .................... 60 Malaysia
973 Bahrain ................... 52 Mexico
375 Belarus ................... 373 Moldova
32 Belgium .................... 382 Montenegro
501 Belize .................... 31 Netherlands
591 Bolivia ................... 599 Netherlands/Antilles
387 Bosnia .................... 64 New Zealand
55 Brazil ..................... 505 Nicaragua
359 Bulgaria .................. 44 Northern Ireland
345 Cayman Islands ............ 47 Norway
56 Chile ...................... 92 Pakistan
57 Colombia ................... 970 Palestine
506 Costa Rica ................ 507 Panama
385 Croatia ................... 51 Peru
357 Cyprus .................... 63 Philippines
420 Czech Republic ............ 48 Poland
45 Denmark .................... 351 Portugal
767 Dominica .................. 40 Romania
809 Dominican Republic ........ 7 Russia
593 Ecuador ................... 966 Saudi Arabia
503 El Salvador ............... 44 Scotland
358 Finland ................... 381 Serbia
33 France ..................... 65 Singapore
49 Germany .................... 421 Slovakia
44 Great Britain .............. 386 Slovenia
30 Greece ..................... 34 Spain
473 Grenada ................... 34 Spain Canary Islands
590 Guadeloupe ................ 94 Sri Lanka
502 Guatemala ................. 758 St. Lucia
509 Haiti ..................... 809 St. Vincent
36 Hungary .................... 46 Sweden
354 Iceland ................... 41 Switzerland
62 Indonesia .................. 963 Syria
98 Iran ........................ 886 Taiwan
964 Iraq ....................... 90 Turkey
353 Ireland .................... 44 Turks and Caicos
972 Israel ..................... 380 Ukraine
39 Italy ....................... 971 United Arab Emirates
876 Jamaica .................... 598 Uruguay
81 Japan ....................... 58 Venezuela
962 Jordan ..................... 84 Vietnam
7 Kazakhstan .................. 44 Wales
82 Korea South

"I also hope that the ones responsible

for the annihilation of the share price are eventually identified, exposed, indicted and incarserated."


Hummmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmm, that would be past/present management of this company.

That's my opinion . . .

WOW -- see that paint on the tape?

100 shares to paint it upward . . .

"the sudden upturn in GTEM. *LOL*"

What??? .. What??? .. have GTEM(Wells Notice) shares gotten back to $4.00??? .. or $4.50??? -- OR EVEN $0.72?????

Exactly HOW BIG has the "SUDDEN UPTURN" in GTEM(Wells Notice) shares?????

"You are speculating on something

you know nothing about."

serious1, that is exactly what you and others are doing when you claim the value of GTEM's(Wells Notice) unfulfilled "Overly Promotional PRs".

My proof is that we were promised that the Stratellite would Fly at Altitude in January 2005. That is less than 2 months shy of 3 years of FAILURE TO DELIVER on the part of GTEM(Wells Notice).

A PIPE DREAM that fails 10 to 20 times is still a PIPE DREAM and the chances that it will succeed diminish with each failure/lie/deceit/deception perpetuated on shareholders and the public. Not saying that someone else will not, at some point, accomplish something similar. But, as I said, GTEM's(Wells Notice) chances appear to have disappeared.

BUT, look on the bright side. GTEM(Wells Notice) has proven to be head and shoulders, YEARS AND YEARS, above the competition when it comes to generating/producing

quantities of legal actions against them.

See, that is YOUR shareholder money producing for YOU.

serious1, "You are speculating on something that you not only don't know anything about -- you are speculating on something that

DOES NOT CURRENTLY EXIST"!!!!!

Cole -- I don't see cause for concern --

The company, GTEM(Wells Notice), assured all of us that they . . .

WERE 3 YEARS AHEAD OF THE COMPETITION!!!!!

Oh, wait a minute, that was almost FOUR YEARS AGO, WASN'T IT?????

Hummmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmm ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ?

I have a question regarding the

4.5 million short shares . . .

Are these "legal" short shares?

Are those 4.5 million shares separate from the grossly illegal "NAKED SHORT SHARES" which are outright fraud and have never really existed?

Thank you for your help.

Nando -- 2 questions --

Was it appropriate?

Can you at least understand, even a little bit, my position?

RhapsodyInBluze -- I also despise those who

manipulate, lie and cheat honest shareholders. If, as you say, there are MM's, hedgefunds, and other entities doing this then I would like to see them face the same fate as I would like to see past/present management of GTEM(Wells Notice).

I want to see anyone/everyone involved in shareholder abuse to be both civilly and criminally prosecuted.

With all of the legal problems that

GTEM(Wells Notice) the question that comes to mind is . . .

Who will turn/flip first?????

My pick would be GTEM(Wells Notice) IR "Robbie" Bleckman.

He is the often spoken of LITTLE FISH (guppy) that prosecutors absolutely love to pressure. It will come down to . . .

That one did this . . . and

That one did that . . . and

Those 3 got together and did such and such . . .

and "I" wasn't involved.

Yep, I can see it now . . .

Robbie the Robot -- wind him up and hear/see him nail the bad guys . . .

More deception from IR Bleckman --

Notice the following from his email (see below):

"We never announced an agreement with Raytheon to begin with. We are confident that our beneficial relationships are continuing and in some cases growing."

Reading that says that they never announced an agreement with Raytheon BUT, likewise it does not say that there is no agreement with Raytheon.

Next, he (IR "Rob) intimates that there is such an agreement by saying:

"We are confident that our beneficial relationships are continuing and in some cases growing."

That is the epitome of double speak and deception.


From: Rob Bleckman
Sent: Wednesday, March 28, 2007 4:55 PM
To: 'Frank IHUB GTEM'
Subject: RE: also this

Frank,

I’m not aware of any bankruptcy in Germany.

In response to your other email,

We are not being evicted from Palmdale and we are not going out of business. We never announced an agreement with Raytheon to begin with. We are confident that our beneficial relationships are continuing and in some cases growing. We believe the source of today’s rumor (you know there’s a new one every day) is a former employee fired for incompetence back in October, the same person who has been posting rumors all along.

We regret that this poster does not have a more constructive use for his time and that he consumes your time and mine with garbage.


Serenity Now,

Rob

"2.3 million dollars is pocket change

for a company that has the technology that we now seem to have."


"Pocket change"?????

GTEM(Wells Notice) has a list of suits against them for not paying bills and, alas, alas, they keep losing these suits. I am sure they would love to have some "pocket change". Oh, wait, perhaps they do have a little change. Remember, they sold 20,000,000 shares over the past year. We went from 108,000,000 OS to about 128,000,000 OS. And guess what??? Those sales took place while GTEM(Wells Notice) was not current with it's financials!!! Now the question is . . .

Were those sales legal?????

Now the next question is . . .

Based on GTEM's(Wells Notice) history would they, GTEM(Wells Notice), care about being legal or illegal???

Next question should be . . .

How much of the money from those questionable stock sales went to pay management and how much/little went toward funding business???

GTEM(Wells Notice) -- inquiring minds want to know . . .

pokestake -- You asked --

"Otherwise why not just cancel it?"

pokestake, that one is easy. Here is the context:

"Given the the prior letters by thc SEC coupled with the Globetel meeting with the SEC on May 17, 2006, it is difficult to believe that any of Globetel's management was not aware of the SEC investigation prior to the Policy's inception. Consequently, should Globetel or its dirctors and officers seek coverage under the 2006-07 Policy, Carolina expressly reserves its right to rescind the 2006-07 Policy."


pokestake, that speaks specifically on the SEC issue and if GTEM(Wells Notice) attempted to make a claim in relation to the SEC issue then the carrier, Carolina "expressly reserves its right to rescind the 2006-07 Policy."

pokestake, the premiums being paid are providing for coverage OTHER than that concerning the SEC issue. If GTEM(Wells Notice) happens to have other suits then the policy may, depending on the circumstances, cover such suits.

If GTEM(Wells Notice) attempts to file a claim associated with the SEC issue (and any derivitives thereof) the carrier would rescind (cancel) the policy and GTEM(Wells Notice) management would be open to fraud and other "criminal" charges.

serious1 -- You posted --

"I refute any and all of the insurance e-mails and anything posted on Joe M (Wells Notice) as out right lies since there is only one man that really knows the truth and that is Joe M (Wells Notice)that anything posted on his site is cut and paste to suit his demented and destructive plans."


serious1, you can "refute" all you want but no person with an open mind can honestly say that Mr. Leder was not abused for months by GTEM(Wells Notice) management.

Read those emails. I know that you haven't because once you do there is no way that you can deny their veracity. Those emails are real. The deceit, deception and abuse from and by GTEM(Wells Notice) CEO Khoury are there for everyone to see. And, to top off the abuse, at this very time GTEM's(Wells Notice) IR Bleckman had the gall to lie to us in an email to justfrank (post 69403) where, using semantics, he said:

"I’m not aware of any bankruptcy in Germany."

That was a lie when the email was sent and it is a lie today.

serious1, you can "refute" all you want to but the truth says differently.

There are a number of additional emails available

that show how Mr. Leder was abused for weeks and weeks by GTEM(Wells Notice) represented by Khoury.

http://www.joemonterosso.com/

I believe that it may have been Skyvision in post 93251 who asked:

"Was the German intiative delivering results?

Was mangagement initially concerned, but then dismayed by poor performance or wasteful behavior on the German end? I don't know - can't tell from the string of emails."

I believe that anyone who reads all of the available emails will see that there is never a question or charge of "poor performance or wasteful behavior on the German end . . .". In fact, if you read all available emails you will find that in one of them Khoury takes responsibility -- ALL RESPONSIBILITY -- for the troubles in Germany.

Skyvision, you will also see where Mr. Leder explains how they are trying to increase business and even to try to reduce costs by renting out office space.

Mr. Leder tried in every way to sustain the German operation but, not only did he not receive any support from GTEM(Wells Notice) but Khoury actually lied to him time after time about sending money required to cover loan payments, payroll and other expenses.

I don't know about anyone else but I say to Mr. Leder -- THANK YOU for being the gentleman that you are and for trying so hard to make the German division a success.

The following is item #32

from GTEM's(Wells Notice) suit against Monterosso:

"32. Defendant maliciously threatened to damage the Plaintiff and it's employees by accusing them of violation of Federal Securities Laws and to expose them to disgrace unless his demands were met regarding the Separation Agreement. Defendant's malicious actions are ongoing."

Now that is really funny -- the SEC has issued a Wells Notice to GTEM accusing them, GTEM(Wells Notice) of, among other things -- FRAUD!!!!!

The question is . . . why didn't GTEM(Wells Notice) include the SEC as a co-defendant in this matter?????

sharklady00 -- you said: "See, some folks see

new management with great possibilities."

Could you name those that you consider "new management" and let us know how recently their association began with this company?


"But, you guys keep rehashing the past over and over and over again. Why?"

Well, because law suits based on the so called "past" are working their way through the court system so that makes all of that "past" current.

Also, because all of the "past" that you want swept under the rug is exactly what the SEC has been and is currently investigating which also makes all of the "past" that bothers you so much to be current and will make it current for quite some time in the future.

Cole, Mr Allan -- just my opinion but

Obtaining the coverage through deception/deceit would not qualify as fraud or be a crime -- placing a claim and trying to obtain coverage would, in my opinion, constitute both fraud and a crime.

You have not defrauded someone until they suffer a loss.

As I said -- just my opinion.