Lawandorder
Las Vegas,#2REBUTTAL Individual responds
Sun, November 02, 2008
Unfortunately, Mr. Frank continues to post his false accusations. He just takes the essentially same information and posts it separately under one of the two companies that he mentioned in his first article. As a person expressly named in his tall tale, I wish to emphasize the fact that, at the age of 65, I have never been accused of fraud or asssistance to fraud before in my life. I have always been known as a correct and honest person. Mr. Cxxxx who obviously must have got his information from a person or persons related to the businesses in question who has respectively have abandoned his or their former associates. It is obvious that this person or persons has or have given Mr. Cxxxx distorted information which he or they hope/s will cause trouble to his/their former associates. I have tried - and still am trying - to help clearing up the mess that has been unnecessarily created by one or more of those persons who have abandoned the business, not least because I want to preserve as much of the substance of these businesses as possible, in the best interst of the investors. That, as a result of my supportive endeavors, I should be attacked by Mr. Cxxxx, who would better remember his earlier involvement in a fraudulent real estate scheme, is really a bitter irony. May it serve as an information to the readers that, up to the present day, no legal action whatsoever has been taken against the persons named by Mr. Cxxxx, neither by a law enforcement agency nor by private persons. It is always very regrettable when a corporate IPO does not generate the positive results that all stakeholders expect. It is also understandable that some of the investors are getting angry and are looking for some person or institution to blame. It is, however, highly objectionalbe to spread unauthenticated information that can destroy the good reputation of individuals and organizations. George Kuenzli, Ph.D., MBA