The basic point still remains in tact. If CSHD and Rufus did infact provide a hypothecation service for HWSF then the proceeds and loans will show up in the 10K. What bothers me about the situation is Mr. Harris' lack of subject matter. I own a company and have had to explain issues on which parties disagreed. You have to be very specific in your explanations in order to prevent vague and diluted statements from being turned against you. Unless you are trying to pollute the waters in order to confuse someone, there is no real reason for not being direct. For example, "We have the bonds and are still under agreement with HWSF because the funding was provided in a timely matter and was available for withdrawl or access within the defined time frame of the contract." That is a direct answer to a direct question. Mr. Harris provided no such remark. I think it is imperative that the fund respond in a public fashion (unless advised otherwise by counsel) to clear up some of the convoluted message that is floating around by pumpers and bashers alike. However, I think the whole Mensah thing is going to be the ultimate element (beside the issues that create the original $15) in either building or dismantling CSHD. It's a bad idea to fraud anyone attached to the government, no matter how small the relationship may be. For everyone's sake, I hope that has not happened.
Market Data 
Markets 
AI
