Replies to post #80014 on Medical Marijuana Inc (MJNA)

[mewille]

Two schools of thought

1 they respond even with a weak statement like "the sa article was misleading and we are exploring legal options"

2 by responding they give the authors some air of being legit. If the ignore they don't give the authors power

I've noticed it was not on google finance. Hopefully that was because google thought sa is unreliable and won't post.

I think they need a statement but if the release goes good Sunday maybe they wont

[CAIrish]

Stuart told me Friday afternoon that we should't expect much talk about the SA article, other than it is false. Due to pending civil and/or criminal action against SA the legal team is restricting much of what the directors would like to say. The wheels are already turning as the legal team started taking depositions Friday.

[GoingGoingLong]

Who cares? The SA article was blatantly biased and false. Do you really need a statement from management? Anyone with 10 minutes to do DD will be able to see the truth for himself.