CMKM Diamonds Inc (fka CMKX)

[pontalba]

By: phxgold
13 Jul 2005, 03:28 PM EDT
Msg. 237519 of 346156
Jump to msg. #
my order for 20m @.00003 still not filled since 830 pacific im pizzed

By: phxgold
21 Jun 2005, 12:47 AM EDT
Msg. 228530 of 346156
(This msg. is a reply to 228520 by Bellingus.)
Jump to msg. #
bellingus there is case law about that here;
"a document that purports to be genuine but is not, because it has been falsely made or manufactured in its entirety." This is a change from the common law, which had a requirement that counterfeit documents be similar to real documents. Under the statute, the counterfeit item "need only bear such likeness or resemblance to the genuine article as is calculated to deceive an honest, sensible and unsuspecting person of ordinary observation and care dealing with a person supposed to be upright and honest."

Citation U.S. v. Prosperi, 201 F.3d 1335 (11th Cir., 2000)
http://www.swlearning.com/blaw/cases/criminal/0301_criminal_03.html

That fits electronic shares imo
~Phx

By: phxgold
01 May 2005, 04:43 AM EDT
Msg. 204792 of 346156
Jump to msg. #
Speaking of conditioning the environment. The funniest thing Ive ever seen is in exibit B of the 8k. Its a letter to Mr Oneil, a supposed expert for the SEC. In the first paragraph it states they had a phone convo about the form 15.
In the second paragraph it states the rules which clearly states that the shareholder count on the last day of the fiscal year for the past 3 fiscal years and in the third paragraph it states that cmkx had 698 shareholders in july. CMKX fiscal year ends dec 31, those numbers are totally irrelevant and they pounced on it. I cannot believe it
Two times once on the phone to test the waters then in writing. They were too eager. Like a teenage boy on the MILF
~Phx

By: phxgold
28 Apr 2005, 05:43 PM EDT
Msg. 203241 of 346156
(This msg. is a reply to 203235 by greenman1515.)
Jump to msg. #
greenman, does this help? it has numbers that prove a naked short beyond a reasonable doubt.
http://www.ahandup.us/is_there_anyone_out_there.htm

By: phxgold
06 Mar 2005, 01:03 PM EST
Msg. 168730 of 346156
Jump to msg. #
I believed they filed the form 15 to force the sec's hand. The form 15 12g/a made cmkx a reporting company again. although the sec didnt know the o/s or float even by using the a/s cmkx had aggrigate fails ammounting to 4b shares for 5 consecutive days. That would have placed cmkx on the show list based on the o/s starting at cob 3march 05. .5% of 800b is 4b. The sec had to act so they used what they could in order to cmkx to the table. i believe cmkx already showed the numbers they had on 2+years of fails. but the sec was blindsided by the form 15. cmkx wanted a sit down months ago but couldnt get it now they have it. all imo
~phx

By: phxgold
15 Jun 2004, 03:32 PM EDT
Msg. 22057 of 346156
Jump to msg. #
IMO those shares but a token few are being absorbed by the masses by someone. This leads me to believe that the pr was put out to give the impression of failure to most. Who put it out and why only one locale? who is benifiting form this pannic sellin? who has the most to loose in the very neer future? 95% no I watch today? .0007-.0006 wtf think people please stop giving it up!!!!!!!!!!!11