Like your typical post on this site, you are basing your comments on your thoughts, and misguided conclusions that you draw, again using non-accurate info (I'm being nice, I probably should just say flat out lies) and I find myself defending myself against them.
"They have had offers and Abbott knows it, that's why they expressed a desire to have an exclusive. Abbott has realized the potential the technology holds and wants to have control."
In part, I place some validity to the Lebed interview because he said that is what the CFO told him. He has already been sued for SEC infractions and I'm sure has learned some lessons, he would not say the CFO said something that he did not! That would be too blatant, and what would he have to gain vs. what he would have to lose?
See, I understand that there is virtually no chance that Abbott is going to return the license, but you filter information through a tenative, skeptical, too good to be true filter that twists and convolutes. Therefore, you are confused and (IMO) have a questionable ability to arrive at rational conclusions.
Here is an example of one of your many comments that are not based on fact:
"From the Lebed alert interview with Wittenberg that you said didn't happen?"
I never said that, and if you claim I did, please post it. You can't!
I think it is wise that you gracefully bow out of any future debates with me regarding your credibility, because I will continue to make you look more and more foolish. Funny how you use and speak for the board as to what they want as your excuse for me to cease pummeling you in the face with these cream pies; just as you consider yourself the unofficial spokesperson for Biocurex, speaking on their behalf to inform investors of what is going on behind the scenes.
If we do indeed need a board jester, you seem to fit all of the qualifications. Please humbly accept my nomination.
