| From: vineyarder77 | 6/9/2006 9:49:23 AM | | | | | | I am posting here as a first time poster. I am doing a little writing about SulphCO. What I first thought was a revolutionary technology. I thankfully have no money in it, but I have been doing my homework on Gunnerman. It blows my mind that people like him can pull what he is pulling off. It is a sham and a travesty. It does make for some pretty good research and reading though. His life story is border book worthy, not because it is inspiring but because people love reading about how sleeze bags and con men.
I have a great Picture of Gunnerman ringing the bell at the AMEX. In researching gunnerman I obviously came across the trial of "tony@pacific" I guess that is the name I will use here. I also found the report about SUF and Gunnerman. I am hoping that someone may have some more information than what I can find just through google and EDGAR. I am not sure if Gunnerman really got this big republican award or if it just part of his PR campaign but if someone can send me a pic of him shaking hands with the pres it would be great.
If this is taken poorly I apologize, I started out doing research to see what the Company was like now I am borderline obsessed with "DR." Gunnerman. After watching Big Love on HBO I am wondering if Rudy is a Polygamists? It would be a great turn in a future novel.
On a side note, if you google map Rudys business headquarters it zooms in oddly close. I have been using g maps for almost a year now and have never seen that before. I wonder if that is related to any "Investigation" or maybe I am reading way to into this.
EIther way I have never had so much fun doing research on such a character. If anyone can send me information pertaining to Rudy let me know. I have a lot, but more is helpful, particulalry as it pertains to the "Starbrite" "Clean Fuels Tech." "The actual deal with Fajuria in UAE" stuff about his wine making and his ashless pellets. It would be great also to know what he is workin on next.
Thanks for any and all help |
| | Anthony@Pacific & TRUTHSEEKER Expose Crims & Scammers!!! | Stock Discussion ForumsShare | RecommendKeepReplyMark as Last Read |
|
| To: StockDung who wrote (1197) | 6/13/2006 10:13:48 AM | | From: ravenseye | | | | Milberg prepares for consequences of indictment for referral fee 'misuse'
...Many onlookers see the US government's indictment of such a powerful law firm as an attack on the class action culture itself. Some are wondering whether Milberg's indictment is the precursor to similar cases being launched against plaintiff firms in other areas of class action litigation such as product liability. ...
thelawyer.com
speaking of product liability cases ...
coldcure.com
...02/16/2005 -- failure to disclose his role and direct interest in the issues which are the subject of those message-board postings is, in the Court’s view, a violation of ER 4.1(a) (“Truthfulness in Statements to Others”) and ER 4.3(“Dealing With Unrepresented Person”) and potentially a violation of ER 8.4(c) (“Misconduct”). Without deciding the wisdom of Mr. Radacosky’s activities or whether those activities conflict with his own clients’ interests, it is clear that his postings have no purpose but to harm a litigation adversary. ...
1. It is not clear to the Court that Matrixx and Zicam do not have a right to identify “painfullyblunt2004” (Mr. Radacosky’s nom de plume) on the Yahoo! Finance Internet message board or any other Internet site. The Court has in mind Matrixx’ counsel’s argument that Matrixx’ rights to speak are circumscribed by federal securities regulations, but remains to be persuaded that Matrixx does not have a non-judicial remedy....
courtminutes.maricopa.gov
btw, post 115745 refers to deleted post 115744 by painfullyblunt2004. check out the dialog after it...
Re: Legal question:
by: jfl_1957 11/02/05 10:58 am
Msg: 115745 of 118646
not many people retiring in their forties.
Posted as a reply to: Msg 115744 by painfullyblunt2004
finance.messages.yahoo.com
*******keep in mind painfullyblunt2004 post 115744 was deleted. for what reason?********
Re: Legal question:
by: boredofpain04 11/02/05 11:43 am
Msg: 115747 of 118646
WOW! way to save face PB04. Somehow I don't think you are able to retire comfortably. So all that work for nothing eh? I guess since you are retired you will be on this board more eh? What a sad despicable life you lead. Did you retire due to the fact that business was drying up?
Posted as a reply to: Msg 115744 by painfullyblunt2004
Re: Legal question:
by: painfullyblunt2004 11/02/05 11:46 am
Msg: 115748 of 118646
Yeah, how right you are.
Posted as a reply to: Msg 115745 by jfl_1957
Re: Legal question:
by: painfullyblunt2004 11/02/05 11:52 am
Msg: 115749 of 118646
As usual, you don't know your ass from a hole in the ground. How in the world would you know how comfortable my retirement is? And, no, I never was at a loss for work--ever. As I said, it must really suck being wrong all the time.
Posted as a reply to: Msg 115747 by boredofpain04
********* First mention of retirement? lma(zz)o ***********
Re: Legal question:
by: pain_is_just_pain 11/02/05 12:05 pm
Msg: 115753 of 118646
<<Did you retire due to the fact that business was drying up? >>
More likely to stave off the inevitable suspension.
Posted as a reply to: Msg 115747 by boredofpain04
Hearing Officer Report filed 07/08/05
supreme.state.az.us
Disciplinary Commission Report filed 11/14/05
supreme.state.az.us
Supreme Court Judgment & Order -- pending?
supreme.state.az.us
Indefinite Disability Inactive Status
11/29/05
supreme.state.az.us
lazy no lma(zz)o busy yes |
| | Anthony@Pacific & TRUTHSEEKER Expose Crims & Scammers!!! | Stock Discussion ForumsShare | RecommendKeepReplyMark as Last ReadRead Replies (2) |
|
| From: ravenseye | 6/13/2006 10:14:38 AM | | | | | | Ex-FBI man's biggest case is his own
...For the FBI, it is the first time in recent memory that the top manager of one of the agency's 56 field offices has been indicted.
And for law officers, the indictment serves as a reminder not to get too close to the people who help them develop criminal cases. ...
mysanantonio.com |
| | Anthony@Pacific & TRUTHSEEKER Expose Crims & Scammers!!! | Stock Discussion ForumsShare | RecommendKeepReplyMark as Last Read |
|
| From: ravenseye | 6/13/2006 10:15:11 AM | | | | | | 29 charged in probe of mob ties to carting
...In addition, a Connecticut state trooper, Paul Galietti, 38, and a federal Drug Enforcement Administration agent were charged in the case. Galietti, the cousin of another defendant, allegedly illegally checked a license plate number for the conspirators. DEA Agent Louis Angioletti, 35, was also charged with illegally accessing a law enforcement computer system....
thejournalnews.com
...Two law enforcement officers also were swept up in the investigation. Former drug enforcement agent Louis Angioletti and Connecticut state trooper Paul Gialetti were charged with illegally accessing police computers to obtain secret information about the investigation for Galante or one of his representatives....
courant.com |
| | Anthony@Pacific & TRUTHSEEKER Expose Crims & Scammers!!! | Stock Discussion ForumsShare | RecommendKeepReplyMark as Last Read |
|
| To: ravenseye who wrote (1199) | 6/13/2006 10:25:41 AM | | From: StockDung | | | | MATRIXX HAS NOT SUED PAINFULLYBLUNT2004. HERE IS A FAMOUS AND TRUTHFULL POST OF HIS.
UNLESS YOU CAN DISPUTE WHAT HE SAYS IS UNTRUE YOU REMAIN A LOON.
Perhaps you should study up a little. You seem to be behind the learning curve here. Let me help you:
Hopefully this has been a helpful review of the medical literature as it relates to Zicam.
by: PAINFULLYBLUNT2004 12/02/05 12:25 am
Msg: 116335 of 116337
Perhaps you should study up a little. You seem to be behind the learning curve here. Let me help you:
There have been three clinical studies involving Zicam.
HIRT STUDY:
The first was the by Hirt, et al. that was published in October 2000. It involved only 213 people, and only 108 of those received treatment with Zicam. There was no serology performed to determine (a) whether the study subjects even had colds, or (b) whether any colds they had were from rhinovirus. And while the study concluded that Zicam reduced the length and severity of colds symptoms, we are still left with a fundamental design flaw. Even assuming for the sake of argument that the Zicam helped, we are left with the question of WHAT it helped. We don't know whether ANY of the subjects even had a cold, as opposed to something else. And we don't know whether any of them had a cold from rhinovirus.
TURNER STUDY:
The study by Turner, with was published in December 2001, corrected the serious design flaw in the Hirt study by first INFECTING the subjects with rhinovirus and then confirming through virology which subjects had a rhinovirus-caused cold. Rhinovirus was confirmed in 69 study subjects, with 32 of them receiving Zicam. The study concluded that "there was no effect of intranasal zinc treatment on rhinovirus infection," and "there was no significant effect of intranasal zinc treatment on rhinovirus-induced illness" [i.e. symptoms]. You will not notice this Gel Tech LLC-funded study mentioned anywhere in Zicam promotional materials or on the Zicam web site (at least not the last time I checked).
MOSSAD STUDY
The Mossad study, which was published in January 2003, involved only 78 patients who were included in the final analysis. Virological studies were done on these participants, which identified only ELEVEN members of the zinc group (i.e. the ones who got Zicam) who had rhinovirus-caused colds. Oddly enough, the analysis was NOT confined to the 27 individuals who actually had rhinovirus-caused colds (11 zinc and 16 placebo), but rather included all 78 participants (51 of whom had God only knows). Mossad concluded that Zicam reduced cold symptom duration from 6 days to 4.3 days and that it reduced the severity of symptoms. However, what relevance is there to symptom duration and severity in participants who didn't have rhinovirus-caused colds? Again, you are left with the question of, even assuming Zicam helped, WHAT did it help?
You have only these three studies done on Zicam. One of which concluded Zicam was essentially useless. The second of which had no idea WHAT the test subjects had. And the third which analyzed the data in a senseless manner--including those whom they KNEW didn't have rhinovirus-caused colds.
Therefore, based on the three studies available, even the fundamental efficacy of Zicam on colds remains in question.
There have been two published articles on Zicam-induced anosmia. The first by Hirsch, et al. in October 2000 and the 2004 Jafek, et al. article. The first was a case report; the second was a case series. Moreover, there has been medical research since the 1930s that clearly documents the connection between intranasal zinc and anosmia.
The total number of subjects with confirmed rhinovirus colds in both the Hirt and Mossad studies COMBINED is 27 (Hirt=0; Mossad=27). The total number of subjects with confirmed rhinovirus colds in the Turner study is 69. That is a ratio in favor of the Turner study of 2.55 to 1.
In light of the Hirt "no serology" problem and the Mossad "fuzzy math" problem, comparing them to the Turner study is like comparing an 8th grade English composition to Tolstoy.
Hopefully this has been a helpful review of the medical literature as it relates to Zicam.
Posted as a reply to: Msg 116323 by hyddub_1999 |
| | Anthony@Pacific & TRUTHSEEKER Expose Crims & Scammers!!! | Stock Discussion ForumsShare | RecommendKeepReplyMark as Last ReadRead Replies (1) |
|
| |
