RE:RE:Cahodeees Joke of a ResponseThings just like to come in threes. Responding to Steve911 I decided to briefly double check the chicken letter. Now the lawsuit is for comments chicken man made about tarring MT as a fraud becuase he was in a company that had fraud. Who cares that MT was never charged or even disciplined by the UC law society. Anyway, that is the issue at hand, but on no: ........... Cahoddeeees gets the brainstorm to write the OSC about CXR. Hey chicken man, got the wrong issue in that version of the PDF. You cut and pasted to the wrong file. .........Asking the OSC to help you with a Bioval related slander because you have some opinions on CXR and are even doing a public service, but no evidence, which chicken man is all a court looks at - Evidence is NOT AN OPINION -........ this letter is a wealth of info on the st@pidity of Cahodeees when you lump this one into the other reflections below.
puma1 wrote: I read that fine piece of literature again and I think an even better example of how completely st@pid this guy is comes from the fine notion that when writing to the OSC, itself a quasi-court of Ontario, he is so dummmm as to imply that MT only filed this in the Ontario Court of Justice because a real court in the USA would never have accepted to claim in the first place. .... Honestly, this is beyond ironic it is bl@@dy dummmmmm. I definitely think that insulting the OSC intelligence and then suggesting Ontario is a Kangaroo jurisdiction is the BEST format to follow with that opening letter. If his chickens dies, he should lecture on How to write a Business Letter. ... Lettuce never even delivered such low hanging fruit to pluck!!!!!
puma1 wrote:
the letter is now out open with any Google search - go read it. After a long winded blurb about himself, he leans into one of his bigger assertions. He actually has the st@pidity to try and get the OSC to consider that there are obviously accounting disclosure issues because CXR has had 2 audit firms and 2 CFO's in short time period. He says all that to them when he knows d@m well that they switched from a mid-tier firm to a big 4. He also knows that the Sept financing group would have made a Big 4 firm a necessary condition of the financing. ......what amazes me is that he thinks the OSC won't understand the reasoning behind the audit and CFO replacements and instead will act on his selectively sliced mis-information. It is insulting to the OSC to treat them with such fallacious arguments. Does that idi0t really expect the OSC to act on such half information?