September 06, 2008 Login | Register

About our Blogs

Blogs found on this website represent the opinion of the author. For more information please visit our terms of use.

Eagletech v. Citigroup Complaint

Location: Blogs Bud Burrell - Front and Center
Posted by: bburrell	4/11/2007 12:22 PM
http://www.clerk-17th-flcourts.org/bccoc2/pubsearch/case_summary.asp?hidCaseNumber=CACE07007880&CACE07007880=CIV&hidSendingPage=search_results&hidCourtType=CIV&hidGeneralType=CIV&mscssid=&user_type=&hidPageName=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.clerk-17th-flcourts.org%2Fbccoc2%2Fpubsearch%2Fpublic_search.asp%3F&btnSummary=View+Selected+Cas

Permalink \| Trackback


Comments (54)

Re: Eagletech v. Citigroup Complaint	By Mike on 4/11/2007 3:07 PM
Hi Bud ! Now we have eagletech and we have citigroup ! Is that the tsunami ? How is the status of the wave ? Reply: That is the complaint referenced.

Re: Eagletech v. Citigroup Complaint	By Olynn1205 on 4/11/2007 3:08 PM
Bud, Thank you very much for all you have done! Thanks for posting this as well! I hope that when USXP finalizes their plan of attack and beats the NSS like "a Rented Mule", they will acknowledge your contributions! May the Lord bless you and keep you safe!

Re: Eagletech v. Citigroup Complaint

By Robert on 4/13/2007 8:03 AM

Imus can make racial slurs and it is worldwide news. Sanjaya does not get kicked off a TV show and it makes headlines. But let the SEC be complicit in the theft of billions of dollars from innocent investors, and you have to beg to get coverage! That is just obscene. This makes the Watergate scandal look like a parking ticket and it seems that the officials are afraid to touch it.

Shameful. I have to agree with Old Duffer. We need to put out an advertisement looking for just one honest government official. Just one. I wonder if anyone would answer the ad.

Re: Eagletech v. Citigroup Complaint

By Valueinvestor on 4/13/2007 9:22 AM

We cannot go around accusing the entire system and expect the same system to help us out...I think what Quinn and Christian are doing is the only way...you have to throw some weight behind your accusations...make a case where the accused have to pay dearly...just hurling accusations has never helped...in this regard, I have a question for Bud, if I may...Faulk mentioned several times in this morning's interview on CFRN that the SEC can open the books on any company in a jiffy and expose every single trade that has been completed, legal and illegal..I was under the impression that even the SEC does not know how to ascertain whether many of these trades are FTDs...Dr. Byrne's 3/31 interview lays out the complexity of how many FTDs are internal to a brokerage house itself...is Faulk saying that even these FTDs the SEC can lay bare in a jiffy if it chooses to ?

Reply: Eagletech got the discovery producing this complaint by Rod representing himself Pro Se appealing his de-registration proceeding.

The system is not going to help anyone out here. Reg SHO has been nearly 8 years in production, and it still isn't done.

The information given EATC by the is available on its trading is available on every single company., The SEC and DTCC have chosen to ignore this at every turn where they could. They know exactly what has been going on and how at every step.

What you call accusations are in fact simple statements of fact. What accusation thus far has not been proved true? My wildest suppositions of 7 years ago are being systematically proved to be not only accurate, but if anything, too conservative. $82 Bilion in daily fails to deliver and receive in the 4th QTR NYSE Focus report? This number started at $6 B. Daily fails are almost as big as the SEC's description of total fails when we started this examination.

Again, NO ONE can expect the system or it bureaucrats and lawyers to do anything to help us except what they are forced to do by the Courts.

This might have been challenged at the end of the T+3 Comment Period, but not now, 6 years later.

Mark is dead right.

Re: Eagletech v. Citigroup Complaint

By Valueinvestor on 4/13/2007 10:38 AM

Sorry Bud, when I said accusations I meant it in the context of the crooks who are accused of this and that...not in the sense they were unfounded charges made by decent folks...my point also was that for David to fight Goliath, David needs to exercise the needful amount of brains and strategy before attacking the giant...that is mind-boggling to me if the SEC can indeed, in a jiffy, open their books and reveal every single trade that took place on a certain company, whether they be real shares or phantom...this is very, very troubling...perhaps, I am only just beginning to fathom the depth of this deception...as usual, thanks for sharing your deep knowledge on this subject...

Reply: No problem at all. I over-reacted. It is kind of like the beaten child syndrome, I have been beat on so many ways, I now flinch if a hand is perceived to be raised, real or not.

Re: Eagletech v. Citigroup Complaint

By Valueinvestor on 4/13/2007 10:44 AM

Sorry for this follow-up...as for Eagletech being able to do what it did, what you are saying then is that this would not have been possible if it were an existing company seeking discovery ? I think I read this somewhere else too...thus, unless a company is bankrupt or gets delisted it cannot seek to obtain all the records from the SEC pertaining to past trades ? thus, for USXP to seek all records, the company first has to declare bankruptcy and Richard Altomare, its CEO, represent himself Pro Se appealing his de-registration ?

EATC was petitioned to de-registration, and appealed all the way the SEC full Commission, which Rod did pro se, getting further than any lawyer so far.

Altomare sued the SEC first, then was counter-sued, but with his judgment against the NSS scum in FL, he has two unique standings. I am sure the SEC would like to screw him, but they can now only do that through the Courts, as they are no longer immune as a litigant, and they are conflicted. Any action they take against him while they are still in front of the Courts is prejudicial, and should result in their being sanctioned.

Even BK companies can't get what EATC got, not unless the US BK Judge orders production. I haven't seen that happen yet.

The SEC is challenging the authority of the BK Court with its attacks on USXP, and I would expect it to go as far as the Supreme Court.

Every day that goes by, the data strikes the SEC in the head again. There is a lot more coming, from many different directions.

Re: Eagletech v. Citigroup Complaint

By mhelburn on 4/14/2007 9:37 AM

This is real news and our legislators are so busy getting donations for the impending campaigns, they are unaware their constituents are taking this in their hands via the courts. The PBS video was an indictment of the SEC and Congress. Dodd came off looking completely corrupt. The Hill is an ivory tower. Whether Demo or Republican, most are ignorant of what is going on.. and if they do know, they won't do anything because Wall Street has paid them to look the other way .

Re: Eagletech v. Citigroup Complaint	By Sean on 4/14/2007 9:02 PM
Another slap in our faces and an insult to our intelligence! By Judith Burns, Of DOW JONES NEWSWIRES WASHINGTON -(Dow Jones)- The Bush administration's plan for a 2.7% increase in the Securities and Exchange Commission budget in the upcoming fiscal year is enough to allow the SEC to "solidly execute" its mission of protecting investors, SEC Chairman Christopher Cox told lawmakers Tuesday.

Re: Eagletech v. Citigroup Complaint

By Stephen The Strong on 4/16/2007 12:17 PM

Hi Bud, perhaps you could answer this question regarding USXP, have they appealed the judges ruling? Do they have to put up a bond or are monies held pending appeal or are no fines due at this point in time. I kniow they have a won a lawsiut against NSS in Florida are they in line to file as Eagle tec has? Thanks for your concideration I await your reply....Stephen

Reply: I don't know their plans on any supplemental filings.

Best, Bud.

Re: Eagletech v. Citigroup Complaint

By briguy331 on 4/16/2007 2:02 PM

Hey Bud, anymore news on how things are progressing with the Eagletech case? And do you expect any other companies to soon follow their lead?

Reply: Things will proceed very slowly because this is a RICO complaint.

I expect first to see the case remanded to Federal Court. Then, there will be the normal Federal Court processes. I will be favorably surprised to see a ruling there in less than a year on just the first motions.

Re: Eagletech v. Citigroup Complaint	By Bill Groover on 4/22/2007 6:39 PM
The basic Rod Young/Eagletech story http://www.hsconnect.com/news/articles.asp?articleID=12943

Re: Eagletech v. Citigroup Complaint	By rollerskate on 4/25/2007 1:17 PM
Business Editor Paul Ginnamore did a great story on Rod Young Eagletech story.The Steubenville Harold Star is about 10 mile west of Rod's home. He did a condensed version of the complaint and Rod was quoted 100% accurate. Sometimes it takes a small town newspaper to get the true story out their. A good read at http://www.hsconnect.com/news/articles.asp?articleID=12943

Re: Eagletech v. Citigroup Complaint	By old1man on 4/27/2007 11:25 AM
For those wo knew me on Raging Bull. I am back. I agree with rollerskate. If and when we ever get to hold a shareholders meeting, you will hear the rest of the story.

Re: Eagletech v. Citigroup Complaint	By old1man on 4/27/2007 9:31 PM
There certainly a lot of activity by EATC lawyers in the Broward county courthouse this week. Eleven (11) motions to grant orders to issue subpeona's. Broward County Case# CACE0312404

Re: Eagletech v. Citigroup Complaint	By old1man on 4/28/2007 7:50 AM
Lots of legal activity by atty's for EATC at broward courthouse.

Re: Eagletech v. Citigroup Complaint	By old1man on 5/3/2007 7:35 AM
A hearing is set for 05/08/07 at 08:45 room 0950. Broward County Court House.

Re: Eagletech v. Citigroup Complaint	By captdale on 5/20/2007 5:06 PM
So - I read the Eagletech v. Citigroup Complaint brief. A bombshell to say the least. I just hope they add the SEC/NASD/DTCC to the defendents list. The only concern I have at this point is the name of the Judge on the case. Any relation to our "Money Masters" family or is that just a coincidence ? captdale

Re: Eagletech v. Citigroup Complaint	By Bill Groover on 5/29/2007 10:58 AM
Anybody have any updates? Thanks, Bill Reply: Eagletech has 90 days after filing to amend/extend the complaint, which amendment is in process.

Re: Eagletech v. Citigroup Complaint	By old1man on 7/5/2007 11:12 AM
Does anyone understand why so many judges have removed themselves from the case?

Re: Eagletech v. Citigroup Complaint	By Bill Groover on 7/5/2007 11:14 AM
Any word on the first suit (4th amended complaint) that's supposed to have a hearing this month? It coming down the tracks like a living thing.

Re: Eagletech v. Citigroup Complaint	By rollerskate on 7/12/2007 7:59 AM
I would appreciate hearing if Eagletech filed the amended complaint. The deadline was today. Reply: The link will be put up as a new post when I get it.

Re: Eagletech v. Citigroup Complaint	By Bill Groover on 7/22/2007 12:47 PM
In another case, Citigroup and Smith Barney have paid out $2M in another short sales case. See http://www.forbes.com/feeds/ap/2007/07/16/ap3918175.html

Re: Eagletech v. Citigroup Complaint	By Bill Groover on 8/1/2007 1:01 PM
According to the Broward Co Court web page, the hearing scheduled for Jul 25th was canceled on Jul 18, but another hearing for the 23rd was scheduled on the 20th. Can you tell us what's up with all that? Thanks. Reply: Nothing more will happen until the amended complaint is filed, and the bad guys aren't pressing the time limit at all. Bud.

Re: Eagletech v. Citigroup Complaint

By Bill Groover on 8/3/2007 12:36 PM

My understanding is the 4th Amended Complaint was filed in Dec '05, and the hearing on Jul 25th was supposed to be another attempt by Defendants to have it dismissed (at least the sixth such motion). Sounds like you are anticipating a 5th Amended Complaint. I hope this won't delay November's jury trial date.

REply: Are you talking about Eagletech or USXP? Eagletech has not filed any amended complaints.

Re: Eagletech v. Citigroup Complaint

By Bill Groover on 8/4/2007 7:08 AM

I'm talking about the first lawsuit Eagletech filed against Saloman Smith Barney et. al. in Nov. '01. Broward Co. Court docket, viewable online, is the primary source of my information and questions. According to it, the 4th Amended Complaint was filed on Dec 28, 2005, if I remember my date correctly.

Reply: The discovery produced this last year supported not only the new complaint, but also proved the old one. That is why you are seeing amendments.

Someone is in deep do-do over this whole mess.

Re: Eagletech v. Citigroup Complaint

By Bill Groover on 9/7/2007 5:34 AM

Bud, Anything happening? I'm thinking about contacting Dateline about updating their story. Lots has come out since then.

Bill

Reply: There is a a big event in Eagletech matters coming out in October. It will nail RICO issues.

That will be something that will prompt REAL Media Coverage, and Dateline will be told to take a flying ---- after their horrific betrayal of this story originally, if anyone has the IQ of a snail. Bloomberg (and Al Jazeera US) will love it.

Re: Eagletech v. Citigroup Complaint	By Bill Groover on 9/11/2007 11:55 AM
Bud, any developements? Looks like we got a new Judge on the old case in Broward Co. I hope you're doing well. Bill Reply: Look for something in about a month. I will circulate it when it goes public.

Re: Eagletech v. Citigroup Complaint	By Rollerskate on 9/25/2007 1:11 PM
Heard the admendment to 2nd filing to happen today. Anyone heard anything? Reply: It is very close to being filed, should see something any day now.

Re: Eagletech v. Citigroup Complaint	By Bill Groover on 10/2/2007 12:50 PM
These docs should make the best sellers list. Filed in Federal court today, courtesy of PACER. http://www.billgroover.com/rico/rico.pdf http://www.billgroover.com/rico/1ac.pdf http://www.billgroover.com/rico/1ac2.pdf http://www.billgroover.com/rico/ml.pdf

Re: Eagletech v. Citigroup Complaint	By Bill Groover on 10/2/2007 12:52 PM
Bud, These docs should make the best sellers list. Filed in Federal Court today. http://www.billgroover.com/rico/rico.pdf Plaintiff's Civil Rico Case Statement http://www.billgroover.com/rico/1ac.pdf 1st Amended Complaint part 1 of 2 http://www.billgroover.com/rico/1ac2.pdf 1st Amended Complaint part 2 of 2 http://www.billgroover.com/rico/ml.pdf Motion for Leave to file

Re: Eagletech v. Citigroup Complaint	By valueinvestor on 7/22/2007 12:50 PM
Bud...I am unable to download the compplaint from that site even after registering to pay...I can't find it on PACER either to download...is there a way to download the 55 pages somewhere ?? thanks... Reply: Send me a email to Bob OBrien and I will forward the complaint to your address. Bud.

Re: Eagletech v. Citigroup Complaint	By ginger on 4/11/2007 3:09 PM
This is the pdf file - it is quite large... http://207.19.102.48/Eagletech%20v%20%20Citigroup%20Complaint--Filestamped.pdf

Re: Eagletech v. Citigroup Complaint	By Mike on 4/11/2007 3:09 PM
Sound like a damn good case ! http://www.internationalshareholdersgroup.com/pdf/Eagletech_v_Citigroup_Complaint_Filestamped.pdf

Re: Eagletech v. Citigroup Complaint	By Mike on 4/11/2007 3:10 PM
Bud, is this the original complaint or did they change something ? This is great stuff ! Reply: This is an entirely new complaint, in addition to the one already in discovery.

Re: Eagletech v. Citigroup Complaint

By Sean on 4/11/2007 3:11 PM

As I have stated before along with many others.. Our sincere thanks for your endless efforts. Please don't let these miscreants raise your blood pressure. Their time is at hand and "there shall be weeping and knashing of teeth". You may find the following info. interesting!!

Issue 2007-47 March 12, 2007

ENFORCEMENT PROCEEDINGS

ROBERT MONTANI, JR. - BROKER-DEALER BAR

Robert Montani, Jr. (Montani) has been barred from association with
any broker or dealer. The sanction was based on wrongdoing underlying
a criminal case against him and was ordered in an administrative
proceeding before an administrative law judge.

Montani pleaded guilty to conspiracy to commit securities fraud and
mail fraud in the U.S. District Court for the District of New Jersey
in January 2007. His wrongdoing occurred while he was associated with
Valley Forge Securities, Inc., a registered broker-dealer. He
defrauded investors by, among other things, conspiring to manipulate
the stocks of Eagletech Communications, Inc., and Nations Media &
Entertainment, Inc. (Rel. 34-55441; File No. 3-12562)

Re: Eagletech v. Citigroup Complaint	By Mike on 4/11/2007 3:38 PM
This complaint is new and not the one you were talking about in the last month ? Reply: There was a prior complaint some years ago. This is the new complaint, which makes its charges based on forensic studies done on newly available evidence. This is THE complaint I spoke about.

Re: Eagletech v. Citigroup Complaint	By Mike on 4/11/2007 5:02 PM
Maybe it was not the tsunami wave ... YET ! But imo it will get together as a "leader" wave with many waves to be the big tsunami wave soon ! Reply: They have 90 days to amend the complaint, and you can expect more causes and more evidence if I were a betting man.

Re: Eagletech v. Citigroup Complaint

By bburrell on 4/11/2007 5:04 PM

Re: A "Tsunami" Headed at Our Markets!!!!! Treason Is what this is!!!!!! By Dallas on 4/11/2007 4:02 PM
Bud, the news is spreading quickly. For those that are unable to download the file, here are a couple links that have it for online viewing, and are fighting for the cause as well. You do good work....keep us informed with your opinions if you can.

http://www.internationalshareholdersgroup.com/pdf/Eagletech_v_Citigroup_Complaint_Filestamped.pdf

http://www.spinoffz.com/forums/EagletechComplaint.pdf

Re: Eagletech v. Citigroup Complaint

By Sean on 4/11/2007 5:47 PM

Bud take a gander at this one!!

Silver Screens Studios: Update Regarding Adoption of Shareholders Integrity Plan to Address its Capital Structure and NOBO Evaluation and Makes Plans to Migrate to NASDAQ Small Cap Market

Counterfeit Share Issue, Dividend and Acquisition Strategy

Oct 23, 2006 12:41:00 PM

Copyright Business Wire 2006

ATLANTA--(BUSINESS WIRE)--

Silver Screen Studios, Inc. (OTCBB: SSSU), http://finance.yahoo.com/q?d=v1&s=sssu.ob implements Shareholders Integrity Plan to address share imbalance, updates facts regarding trading in the company shares by TD Ameritrade and moves ahead with first acquisition and Reg. E Funds.

TD Ameritrade Facts:

According to the NOBO list SSSU has 770 account holders at TD Ameritrade who have been prevented buying shares in the company. We are in the process of determining the number of shares contained in those accounts.

Facts:

1. The purchase restriction was placed on the company's shares by TD Ameritrade after we announced we were requesting a NOBO list and suspected failure to deliver positions in our shares.

2. On July 14, 2006 a day in which we traded 122 million shares, TD Ameritrade would not allow trading on their platform for 2 hours.

3. A new Market Maker SBSH has recently entered trading in our shares since we requested the NOBO list. According to www.OTCBB.com SBSH is Citigroup Global Markets, a joint venture partner with the DTCC, http://www.dtcc.com/PressRoom/2006/managed_accounts.html, http://www.dtcc.com/Publications/dtcc/sept06/dtcc_partners_with _citigroup.html. (Due to its length, this URL may need to be copied/pasted into your Internet browser's address field. Remove the extra space if one exists.)

SSSU Strategy Concerning Counterfeit Shares:

The company is discussing its strategy with legal counsel, investment banking counsel and will have a plan in effect to address counterfeit shares, failure to delivery positions, and any short selling of its shares later this week.

Phase I of the Shareholders Integrity Plan.

The SIP's implementation is proceeding ahead with a planned acquisition of a real estate franchising company for distressed assets as well as a commercial mortgage company for financing of the assets.

Reg. E Funding of Acquisition.

Our first Reg. E Fund will make the initial investment in the franchising and mortgage company. We are negotiating terms for initial investments in the fund.

We plan to have definitive contracts in place this week for the closing of the acquisitions and the planned spin out of shares to our shareholders.

Implementation of Acquisition and SIP:

The management of SSSU has accessed a shareholders list as of 10-11-2006. This list was compared to the NOBO list as of 10-11-2006. The shares in excess of the official total as compiled by the transfer agent will be deemed "counterfeit shares," see http://www.bdcjournal.com/currentissue.pdf, and pages 10-12 on the issue of counterfeit shares.

Counterfeit Shares:

Any position deemed counterfeit will be deemed to be short a failure to deliver share; each failure to deliver share outstanding of SSSU shall be deemed liable as follows:

Counterfeit Shares Liability:

Each counterfeit share shall be liable to SSSU as follows:

(i) $1.00 per share in cash; plus

(ii) The 52 week high of $.052 multiplied by 7.77 multiplied by the number of days the failure to deliver position has been open.

(iii) There are currently 102,767,486 shares unaccounted for.

Shareholder Benefits and Dividend Distribution:

We have developed the dividend program with one of the Reg. E. Funds. Each Reg. E fund can raise up to $5.0 million per year exempt from registration. We are working out the details of a dividend valued in the range of $0.05-$0.12 per share.

Summary:

The SIP will have no effect on our current shareholders. The SIP will affect the imbalance in shares that have failed to be delivered and remain open. We are proceeding with actions deemed necessary to protect the shareholder base and structure our company for growth.

About Global 1 Investment Corporation:

The family of funds we construct will have equity, fixed income, real estate securities, mortgages, affordable housing and commercial assets as investment opportunities for different classes of investors.

Disclaimer: The below disclaimer is incorporated by reference as if fully set forth herein this as well as all media releases on SSS behalf. The statements contained in this released are forward looking and may or may not occur due to forces beyond the company's control.

Source: Silver Screen Studios, Inc.

----------------------------------------------

Silver Screen Studios
Inc.
Atlanta
Barry Thomas
404-255-0400
sssu*mindspring.com

http://www.allstocks.com/stockmessageboard/cgi-bin/ultimatebb.cgi/ubb/get_topic/f/8/t/024606/p/5.html?

Re: Eagletech v. Citigroup Complaint

By Stephen the Strong on 4/11/2007 6:00 PM

Good to see that the fight goes on.......funny how city bank annouces the layoff of what was it 17,000 employees in there restructuring. The paper shredders are gonna be working over time. If I have a cash account with Citi Bank in which I own securities that have been shorted ie....usxp, gwgo, cnes...adot.... are they my stocks or me at risk? Because I own them long in a cash account are they safe...insured?...I know that they are owned in street name....but I as a the consumer with a statement do I have security? Is this proof ownership good enough? Thanks Bud......

Re: Eagletech v. Citigroup Complaint

By Blackbart on 4/11/2007 7:31 PM

The SEC SAT on the evidence for five fucking years to avoid prosecuting the crooks and then suspended trading in the stock. I trust there are thousands of other companies that they are also doing this to or have done in the past. These people need to be tried and executed in mass.

Reply: I prefer they serve a lifetime as slave laborers in Bangladesh, with any lawyers involved having to clean the toilets of the slaves. As I once noted, the Romans viewed life in prison to be a cruel and unusual punishment.

Re: Eagletech v. Citigroup Complaint

By old duffer on 4/12/2007 1:19 AM

Bud,

Will this take years?tia

Reply: It will take a year to get to just the first motion to dismiss.

The damage to the criminals here is potentially in the billions, as this claim will be cloned over and over, by as many, potentially, as another 1000 or more companies and their shareholders, executives and counsel.

What you can't see here is the evidence, and when that comes out, the SEC is TOAST, AND DESERVEDLY SO. IT MUST BE LIQUIDATED, AND ITS FUNCTIONS SENT ELSEWHERE, LIKE DOJ AND TREASURY. THERE IS A SEC BATES NUMBER ON EVERY ONE OF THE 49,497 PAGES OF EVIDENCE REFERENCED.

I WILL BE INTERESTED TO SEE HOW THEY AND THE DTCC SURVIVE SANCTION MOTIONS FOR PRIOR NUMEROUS PERJURIES AND LIES, AND HOW THEIR ATTORNIES REACT TO SANCTIONS THAT SHOULD SEE THEM DISBARRED.

A RAFT OF VICIOUSLY MANIPULATED PARTIES ARE GOING TO BE PLAYING FOR BLOOD HERE, AND NOTHING ELSE WILL SATIFY THEM.

Re: Eagletech v. Citigroup Complaint	By bbhindyou on 4/12/2007 7:36 AM
The first blood in the water seems to be citi's. The other sharks won't care that citi is one of the top predators the smell of blood will cause a feeding frenzy,I hope citi manages to bloody a few more on their way out so the process will continue.

Re: Eagletech v. Citigroup Complaint

By old duffer on 4/12/2007 7:36 AM

Thanks Bud, this time problem shows why it is so tough for the small man. He has his resorces taken away and it takes years to enev have a chance to recover. The rich thieves lack for nothing all the while stealing billions and billion more in that time.

Is there a honest man in power anywhere in our Government.? We the people are in deparate need of a honest man or woman with power to help.

I fear all in power are in the camp of the crooks. I will keep moving into other markets besides the US markets with even more going into gold and silver. The problem is with the world this dirty where is any hope for our children?

God is the only real refuge!

Re: Eagletech v. Citigroup Complaint	By Robert on 4/12/2007 7:38 AM
I like seeing you getting heated up again on this issue. Seeing the passion you have for the cause gives us all hope that we will win.

Re: Eagletech v. Citigroup Complaint

By Sean on 4/12/2007 7:39 AM

Companies have finally had enough!!

This is too funny. Re: DTC and BHUB...
DTC is warning market participants to prepare to protect themselves. SEC steps in to help by suspending trading on the stock--hoping they can encourage a few more sellers when trading resumes. What a bunch of totally obvious crooks...
BHUB - DTC Announcemnt
Document Link:
http://www.dtc.org/impNtc/ope/ope_1376-07.pdf

The Depository Trust Company
IMPORTANT
B#: 1376 - 07
DATE: April 11, 2007

TO: All Participants, Depository Facilities and Pledgee Banks

CATEGORY: Operations

FROM: Michael Tulaney, Vice President

ATTENTION: Managing Partners, Officers and Cashiers

SUBJECT: Special Alert Regarding BigHub.com

Please be advised that effective April 11, 2007 DTC has suspended all services, except Custody services, for the below referenced issue.

CUSIP SECURITY NAME
089865109 BigHub.com

Please see the attached press release providing notice that there are in excess of 1.5 billion unregistered
shares and the company intends to have these shares cancelled.

DTC participants are strongly urged to take whatever precautions are necessary to protect themselves and their customers in light of this information and to notify correspondent firms as well as other potentially affected parties.

Questions regarding this notice should be directed to the company or DTC’s Michael Ames at (212) 855-
4535.

The BigHub.com, Inc. Receives Information from Select American Transfer Company
Tuesday April 10, 8:30 am ET
JENSEN BEACH, Fla., April 10 /PRNewswire-FirstCall/ -- The BigHub.com, Inc. (OTC Pinksheets: BHUB) announced today that the prior stock transfer agent, Select American Transfer Company, has informed the Company that there are currently 1,580,847,798 shares issued. The shares issued are 1,530,847,798 more than the legal authorized shares of the Company and 1,559,162,277 more shares than issued per the Company records.

The Company believes that the excess shares have been issued as unregistered shares, as defined by the Securities and Exchange Act, of a Delaware corporation unaffiliated with the Company. Select American Transfer has provided the Company with a list of all issuances of unregistered shares which commenced on or about September 8, 2005. The Company intends to engage legal counsel in Florida and Toronto to have these shares cancelled and to pursue the parties issued shares from September 8, 2005 through October 25, 2006. The Company will be pursuing damages in excess of $6,600,000.

The Company intends to immediately notify www.pinksheets.com as to the share structure of the Company and provide them with an information statement required under Section 15 (c) 2-11. We believe the information will be available within 24 hours of submission.

The Company previously announced that it has engaged Olde Monmouth Stock Transfer, Inc. to handle its authorized stock transfers.

The BigHub.com, Inc. (Pink Sheets: BHUB - News) will continue to review potential business ventures or acquisitions during this process.

Source: The BigHub.com, Inc.

Re: Eagletech v. Citigroup Complaint

By BobR. on 4/12/2007 7:40 AM

These are the Defendants:

Citigroup, Inc; Citibank, N.A.; Lewco Securities Corporation; Schroeder & Co., Inc.; JP Morgan Chase & Co.; The Bank of New York Company; Schroder plc; Merrill Lynch, Pierce, Fenner, & Smith Inc.; Herzog, Heine, Geduld, LLC; Knight Equity Markets LP d/b/a Knight Securities; Man Group, plc d/b/a Man Financial, Inc.; Goldman Sachs Execution & Clearing, L.P. f/k/a Spear, Leeds & Kellogg and f/k/a First Options of Chicago, Inc.; Prudential Equity Group, LLC f/k/a Prudential Securities Incorporated; Bear, Stearns Securities Corp. Inc.; Ryan & Co., LP d/b/a S.W. Ryan & Co., Inc. and d/b/a Generation Capital Associates; Grady & Hatch, Co., Inc.; NF Clearing, Inc. d/b/a Fiserv Securities, Inc; Tucker Anthony Incorporated; J.E. Liss & Co., Inc.; J. Alexander Securities Inc.; Madison Bank; Oscar Gruss & Son, Inc.; ... and 100 John Doe defendants or their nominee entities, comprising both individuals and corporations, collectively,

Defendants

Like the turn you're making .. don't forget this one, will help your entire spine and all cells .. "Whom the gods will destroy .. they first make angry." LOL

Blessings, BobR.

Re: Eagletech v. Citigroup Complaint	By cynabear on 4/12/2007 7:42 AM
this is as tremendous as it is horrendous.......get Madame LaFarge on overtime! The members of the SEC should be doing landmine recovery in Iraq Reply: I could go for this, as long as they get Muslim treatment of stealing: They lose their right hands first, so that they have to do the work with the one hand they have left for eating and wiping.

Re: Eagletech v. Citigroup Complaint	By Mike on 4/12/2007 12:29 PM
Looks like the world starts to understand what is happening ! I see more and more mails and postings about Eagletech !!! Hopefully the media will boost this up !

Re: Eagletech v. Citigroup Complaint

By b8nw84u on 4/12/2007 6:23 PM

This week, NOW takes a close look at hedge funds—sometimes secretive and often very risky investment accounts that have brought incredible wealth and power to some, but with the potential to spell dire consequences for ordinary Americans. Hundreds of billions of dollars are invested in hedge funds, which are not regulated, and there's a good chance some of your retirement money's in one. But many hedge fund managers say they won't tell anyone how they make their money—not even the government.

In its investigation, NOW interviews former SEC lawyer-turned whistleblower Gary Aguirre. As part of his job, Aguirre investigated hedge funds and says he was banned from probing a Wall Street titan with close ties to the Bush Administration.

"I was just following an evidence trail, and it led to that door," Aguirre tells NOW. "The logical thing was to knock on the door and try to find out what was behind it."

http://www.pbs.org/now/shows/315/index.html

Re: Eagletech v. Citigroup Complaint	By Freddo on 4/12/2007 6:38 PM
Well Mike.....Honestly I am very suprised Bloomberg hasn't run something in reference to this..... I cannot for the life of me figure out why this is NO WHERE in the media.... Reply: It is a pattern repeated over and over. There is media coverage however, which all will see the results of within a month. I have no idea why Bloomberg hasn't picked it up.

Re: Eagletech v. Citigroup Complaint

By musketfifle on 4/12/2007 8:13 PM

PBS Hedge Fund Special
About the Show
[Streaming video of this program will be available online after broadcast]

This week, NOW takes a close look at hedge funds—sometimes secretive and often very risky investment accounts that have brought incredible wealth and power to some, but with the potential to spell dire consequences for ordinary Americans. Hundreds of billions of dollars are invested in hedge funds, which are not regulated, and there's a good chance some of your retirement money's in one. But many hedge fund managers say they won't tell anyone how they make their money—not even the government.

In its investigation, NOW interviews former SEC lawyer-turned whistleblower Gary Aguirre. As part of his job, Aguirre investigated hedge funds and says he was banned from probing a Wall Street titan with close ties to the Bush Administration.

"I was just following an evidence trail, and it led to that door," Aguirre tells NOW. "The logical thing was to knock on the door and try to find out what was behind it."

http://www.pbs.org/now/shows/315/index.html

Re: Eagletech v. Citigroup Complaint

By ginger on 4/12/2007 8:13 PM

http://www.pbs.org/now/shows/315/index.html

This week, NOW takes a close look at hedge funds—sometimes secretive and often very risky investment accounts that have brought incredible wealth and power to some, but with the potential to spell dire consequences for ordinary Americans. Hundreds of billions of dollars are invested in hedge funds, which are not regulated, and there's a good chance some of your retirement money's in one. But many hedge fund managers say they won't tell anyone how they make their money—not even the government.

In its investigation, NOW interviews former SEC lawyer-turned whistleblower Gary Aguirre. As part of his job, Aguirre investigated hedge funds and says he was banned from probing a Wall Street titan with close ties to the Bush Administration.

"I was just following an evidence trail, and it led to that door," Aguirre tells NOW. "The logical thing was to knock on the door and try to find out what was behind it."

Re: Eagletech v. Citigroup Complaint	By wb6inv on 4/12/2007 11:56 PM
Re: Muslim punishment. In addition, NO SOAP for the remaining hand.