Replies to post #44400 on Cdex, Inc. (fka CDEX)

[Amanita]

CDEX INC quotable quotes


so a few know first hand, begging ain't my style. Loch/Cdex has been a hands on in person and face to face meetings, which is my style.

Anyplace anytime anywhere is my style when it comes to doing what is right for ALL shareholders, not some made up OCC.

My tracks where made in wet concrete, and they are there for all to see who participated in Loch/Cdex.

[pennstreet]

theciscokidd--

The truth concerning Mr Brumfield and Cdex is well documented in the filings of the SEC.

Which is exactly why there is not one thread of SEC evidence in any filing at Loch Harris or Cdex, until 2004.

The truth of the time line is a very well known fact among funders.

It is a fact on this board, that distortion of truth is seen on a daily basis concerning the CEO of Cdex.

There was no administrative assistant, or any other individual that talked to Mr. Brumfield in 2003, 2002, 2001, 2000, 1999, or any time prior to these years, concerning Loch Harris or 2 for1 mumbo jumbo.

I confirm the above sentence as a fact, and not an opinion.

I have many many times asked anyone on this board for the individual who introduced Mr. Brumfield to Mp and Cdex.

There are many who know the facts.

But there is not one on this board (outside the obvious) who knows the facts.

And the thought of Mr. Brumfield posting is laughable.

[Amanita]

Cdex speaks

It's clear that the three leading topics of defenders of cdex appear to be Loch-Harris and bumfield's evolvement, the bumfield caused cdex bankruptcy, and some ex-employees of cdex. Providing the most irritation to those who differ on material with claims of "laughability" over substance.

Let's look at these subjects too. Why would someone who now thinks it's laughable that a cdex insider is posting here on a public board about the inner workings of cdex still be vociferously defending someone he is claiming to know detailed knowledge about, but not disavowing the publicly available knowledge presented in recent posts.

Why would anyone try to claim that every word typed by themselves is the no questions asked , definitive truth, just the simple facts routine.

Why claim that you know every detail of the bumfield cdex bankruptcy, from words spoke to comments made by note holders in communication with officers of cdex, etc. without providing reasonable evidence of ones claims. It's one thing to reference a document, and another to just say "you" know for a fact. Once one makes a claim that they were there when poteet told Malcolm Philips that he(poteet) was leaving and how it went down, it get's a bit absurd to claim causal cdex defender. There is even a post concerning physical marks on the body of bumfield as proof another party's claims are not to be believed, that's troubling on it's face (or was it his hand).

To continually make references like "it wasn't bumfield's fault" for this event or that event, again without providing reasonable evidence to substantiate those claims is on it face what some would call just plain juvenile disavowalment.

The problem with all of it is that the cat is outa the bag so to speak to followers of this board who can judge for themselves what is and isn't.

Here is one of those blame someone else posts that tells a story. This one from the "cdex points" list There are many, many more.


Extraordinary is when your kingdom gets jerked out from under you, do to the pos's in Washington, that caused the real estate FALL, then one gets ex Cdex employees, who cannot do what 14 others did, and it throws Cdex under the bus.........