InvestorsHub Logo
Followers 8
Posts 1327
Boards Moderated 0
Alias Born 04/27/2005

Re: prophetti post# 3410

Saturday, 05/28/2005 10:55:28 PM

Saturday, May 28, 2005 10:55:28 PM

Post# of 361678
prophetti, did you read the headline on that "positive" article? is the word "harmonized" what makes it positive to you?

let me ask you this... how many times has the JDA issued a "negative" PR?

imo, they NEVER have, and they NEVER will...

here's the official JDA PR that followed the meeting last month - you know the one that started late because some of the STP delegates had to be replaced; the one that caused this whole mess we're in; the one that (if we choose to believe SK) went "flawlessly" according to the JDA:

***After exhaustive deliberations, the JMC has in line with the prescribed Treaty provision, forwarded its recommendations to the Heads of States for endorsement.
4. As soon as it is obtained the results of the rounds will be announced.***

reading that PR I almost want to yell out one of those big "woooo hoooos" we hear so much. not quite, eh???

now they say they "harmonized". the only thing they "harmonized" about was ending the meeting without a consensus and that the matter had to go to the heads of state for a decision.

the JDA is not going to tell anyone anything negative. they ALWAYS, ALWAYS lead us to believe things are perfectly in order, that the end is just a day or to away, that the matter "is done", yada, yada, yada.

i lost the last shred of credibility for the JDA yesterday. they cannot be replied upon and cannot be trusted, IMO.

those looking to blame someone/something for a selloff should look no further than the JDA.

i respect every opinion here, but i simply cannot view the PR you cited in a positive light, no matter how i read it.