OffshoreAlert
Daily news, documents and intelligence about Offshore Financial Centers and those who conduct business in them that you will not find anywhere else.
RSS Feed Print
Huck/Daniel J. Wright/Diligizer
Anonymous
Posted: Friday, August 12, 2011

Posted: 9/4/2002 10:01:27 PM

By: Alp, once again, your character betrays you.

For someone who decries and defames others for using invective and personal attacks, your post seems a tad hypcritical, n'est-ce pas?

"The "in bed with Bukovich and Alp." is pure conjecture on the demented person's part.".

No, Alp. It is not, I have lots of proof, including e-mails sent to all of the Diligizers, and you. You never had administrative powers, but only, because you didn't want them. You use the e-mail address alpine1600@aol for those Diligizer group memos/advises.


"One, I have never done any business in asset recovery, with Tony or anyone else."


Never said you did, don't think you did.


"Two, I have never done, nor would ever have done any business with Daniel (his poor judgment in befriending the monstruosity earned my disapproval and dislike early on)."

If this is the case, Alp, why did you, James Kramer-Wilt, Paul Renner, Daniel, and Tony Bukovich make full financial disclosure to each other about one another?



"I respect Tony a great deal, no matter what twitheaded adventures he may have gone on in the past. I am confident that, unlike others, his intent was never to defraud anyone. Period."


That's nice Alp. The SEC disagrees with you. To wit:


"The complaint alleges that from at least April 1994 to September 1994, the defendants defrauded investors by making numerous misrepresentations and omissions of material fact in connection with the offer of two investment contracts based on the purchase and sale of so-called "prime bank securities." The complaint alleges that the first offer promised investors a 9% weekly return, guaranteed by a top five United States bank or trust, and required a $10 million minimum investment which would remain 100% safe in the investors' bank account. The complaint further alleges that several defendants offered a second prime bank investment requiring an $870,000 minimum investment which was purportedly to be used to purchase and sell discounted, $1 million guarantees issued by the top fifteen banks in western Europe. The second offer, which was interrupted by the staff's investigation, promised that the bank guarantees would be resold to a major U.S. brokerage firm for no less than $925,000. In both schemes, investors were asked to execute a Limited Power of Attorney providing access to their funds."


AND

"The Commission's complaint, filed on August 23, 1995, alleged that Bukovich, Six Capital and others violated the antifraud statute by offering for sale investment contracts which were part of a prime bank scheme. The Commission alleged and the Court found that Bukovich and Six Capital attempted to obtain funds from investors in two different schemes by misrepresenting or failing to disclose material facts in connection with the offering of fraudulent, nonexistent prime bank securities. Among the misrepresentations made by Bukovich and Six Capital, the Court found that the defendants misrepresented to investors that the trading program involved trading in supposed "bank guarantees" issued by the top 15 banks in western Europe, that the investment in the bank guarantee program was a 'clean, neat, safe, legitimate transaction', and that they had sold prime bank instruments in the past. Bukovich and Six Capital, while investing nothing of their own, stood to receive 50% of the trading profits on each trade made. For more information, see L.R. 14600, L.R. 15231, L.R.15287, L.R. 15358"


How WOULD you define Tony Bukovich's intent, Alp?



"As far as making any money from the Diligizer Board. I have never made a penny from it, and never expected to."


Alp dear, you JUST said: "I DID advise Tony, and contemplate (and might still contemplate) doing business with him insofar as offering certain databases to financial institutions on a subscription basis.".

SURELY you don't expect anyone to believe that a large part of the content of these databases does not come from postings on the DILIGIZER board, do you?









Anonymous
Posted: Friday, August 12, 2011

Posted: 9/4/2002 8:00:53 PM

By: Alp in reply to Lisa's lies

Lisa states:

"My only issue with Daniel, before finding out he had not disclosed the Westgate Development case, and his bankruptcy to me, was that he was in bed with Bukovich and Alp. I never questioned Daniel's honor, or motivation, and to date, I have never called him a crook, or any other derogatory name. HOWEVER, in the last two months, he did lie to me repeatedly."

The "in bed with Bukovich and Alp." is pure conjecture on the demented person's part.

One, I have never done any business in asset recovery, with Tony or anyone else.

Two, I have never done, nor would ever have done any business with Daniel (his poor judgment in befriending the monstruosity earned my disapproval and dislike early on).

I DID advise Tony, and contemplate (and might still contemplate) doing business with him insofar as offering certain databases to financial institutions on a subscription basis. I respect Tony a great deal, no matter what twitheaded adventures he may have gone on in the past. I am confident that, unlike others, his intent was never to defraud anyone. Period.

As far as making any money from the Diligizer Board. I have never made a penny from it, and never expected to. I felt that a lot of disinformation was being circulated on subjects with which I am intimately familiar. Consequently, it seemed to me that anything I could do to correct any disinformation and dispel any erroneous notions was a good thing. Perhaps even a duty of sorts. I no longer feel this way. I now take the view that there is a darwinian force at work in finance as everywhere else, and that if I can be attacked, pursued and falsely targeted by morons like Lisa, David and Jay, then the punters can go to hell, and you can all die the way you presently remain.... dismally ignorant.


Anonymous
Posted: Friday, August 12, 2011

Posted: 9/4/2002 3:19:42 PM

By: Think I got it and thanks

Agree that players might be wrong word. Also can't argue with their level of involvement in the board. Also can't argue with your descrption of their involvement in the board since I never knew that much about the adminstrative duties of the board and who did what.

Looks like most of your problems boil down to Tony's activities and use of the board. I was probably confused about this because of all the recent postings about the release by the Serious Fraud Office which had nothing to do with Tony.

Also beats me whether there was any hidden agenda associated with the board. I have read the old postings that have recently been posted at other boards and read a lot of your comments but am still undecided on that one. Figure to keep using the board until people come forward with information to support your claims (i.e. problems) or to provide information on their experience with using Tony or others associated with the board.

hunter

hunter



Anonymous
Posted: Friday, August 12, 2011

Posted: 9/4/2002 2:38:09 PM

By: Lisa corrects Lisa's previous post

"If that is true then does it boil down to you didn't approve of some posters recommending the services of others? What exactly do you see wrong with posters at the board recommending others?"

Take the first sentence out of this paragraph, as it is not relevant to hunter's question, and belongs in a response further down on my previous post.: >>If you are talking about Claw/Kramer-Wilt, no, and I never said I did.


Anonymous
Posted: Friday, August 12, 2011

Posted: 9/4/2002 2:31:37 PM

By: Lisa Ann Arden

"It appears that you knew for some time about Daniel's past."

I knew (was told by Daniel) Daniel had been a "believer" and chaser of the "Grail" for 10+ years. I knew Daniel had gone to Europe in excess of 50 times looking for the "real deal". Nothing more.




"Also I am under the impression that you were aware of Tony's past."

I knew (was told by Daniel and Kramer-Wilt)) that Bukovich had been a believer for 12+ years, and chasing the "Grail" for just that long. I knew Bukovcih had been giving James Kramer-Wilt information (some might say, he was an informant) for that entire period of time. I knew "Mark Rogers" was a "due diligence/asset recovery" man.

I CAME to know, he was constantly soliciting for business on Diligizer, on my own, over time.




"If so then is it true that you had no problem with ex-HYIP players assisting with the Diligizer board?"

Correct if you take out the word "players" and put in "believers" and leave in the prefix EX. But, assisting is the WRONG word. They were co-Diligizers/FULL administrators.



"If that is true then does it boil down to you didn't approve of some posters recommending the services of others? What exactly do you see wrong with posters at the board recommending others?"

If you are talking about Claw/Kramer-Wilt, no, and I never said I did. If you are talking about DILIGIZER, inga, Tonto, Henry, Cy Saunders, Mark Rogers, ddman, Maxwell Smart, Henry, ddonhyip, and others, those are ALL Tony Bukovich's pseudonyms, so recommending, would be the wrong word.


These were, and are my concerns/problems with/issues:


If the board has a hidden agenda ie to enable one of the principals to cull and cultivate business of any kind without telling readers that is the case, that's a problem.

If that principal of the board is in the DD/asset recovery business, and is unlicensed, that's a problem.

If the principal of that board is advertising on the board under aliases, that's a problem.

If the principal of the board is not telling people when they communicate that he is a principal of the Diligizer board, that's a problem.

If the principal of the board is entering into contracts for service, and accepting fees using a false name, that's a problem (and illegal). No accountability, no recourse.

If a person is engaged in any kind of involvement with funds, he has a responsibility to inform his clients of his own financial history. If Bukovich is using aliases, obviously, he CAN NOT be doing this. If he uses his real name, does he tell people about his $670k+ tax lien?

If a person has had an action brought against him by the SEC, and does not so inform his clients, that's a problem.

If Diligizer maintains a Black List on which the names of people with SEC actions against them, etc. (specifically those involved in HYIP), and neither the principal of the board, nor any of his co-defendents are listed there, that's a problem.

If a government official refers business to, or reccomends, or is in business with, or lends credibility to a person such as the one described above, that's a problem. If he uses his governemnt office and equipment and time to do so, it's a bit more of a problem.

If people of honor elect to involve themselves in an endeavour with someone who fits the above parameters, and is engaging in the above behavior, it ipso facto impacts and reflects upon their own reputation and character.


And you can now add, Daniel's involvement with Westgate, and Renner's obfuscation, utilization of the "Black List" as a tool for vengance and/or reward, and debatable credentials for being a "Special Advisor" to the ICC, and the ASTOUNDING HYPOCRISY of Claw/Kramer-Wilt being a two time Bankrupt and yet being so critical of other bankrupts.


"Do you have any proof that those being recommended took money without providing any services?"

I never said that. Providing information you have warehoused over thirteen years about people with whom you attempted to do "business" in the pursuit of FRAUD, is of questionable value to me, but, it is a service, I guess. TRYING (or saying you're trying, when you have NO AUTHORITY or POWER to do so) to recover money lost to fraud, is I guess, a service.




"Do you have any proof that those doing the recommending received compensation?"


Ditto my answer above:

If you are talking about Claw/Kramer-Wilt, no, and I never said I did. If you are talking about DILIGIZER, inga, Tonto, Henry, Cy Saunders, Mark Rogers, ddman, Maxwell Smart, Henry, ddonhyip, and others, those are ALL Tony Bukovich's pseudonyms, so recommending, would be the wrong word.




"It would be great if you could outline your concerns and what documentation or proof you have to warrant those concerns."

See the above.




"Until your post I wasn't aware that you knew so much about Daniel's past so am now confused about what are the issues."

My only issue with Daniel, before finding out he had not disclosed the Westgate Development case, and his bankruptcy to me, was that he was in bed with Bukovich and Alp. I never questioned Daniel's honor, or motivation, and to date, I have never called him a crook, or any other derogatory name. HOWEVER, in the last two months, he did lie to me repeatedly.




"It appears I definitely had the wrong impression that you didn't think ex-HYIP players should be involved in running the board."

Again, I don't know in what context you employ the word "players". I was informed within the last 6 months that Bukovich was in fact STILL/CURRENTLY a "believer" and "chasing the Grail", and when I confronted Claw/Kramer-Wilt with this, he acknowledged it was probably true. THAT I have a BIG problem with. People can, and do, change. I had NO problem with FORMER "believers" running Diligizer.



"My bad and will cross that off the list. Also I thought you wanted Tony removed from any involvement with board?"

I did. What's your point/question? Now, I think that the Diligizer board should cease to exist.




"Once again I thought that was in part due to his past but I must have misunderstood so will croos that off the list. I am now guessing that you don't want him involved in the board because you don't think he can provide services to investors who have lost funds? Is that correct?"

See the above.



Anonymous
Posted: Friday, August 12, 2011

Posted: 9/4/2002 1:52:34 PM

By: Please explain to hunter

Hopefully this exchange will remain civil. As you already know I was surprised about the recent information posted. It appears that you knew for some time about Daniel's past. Also I am under the impression that you were aware of Tony's past. Are those two comments, about Daniel and Tony, correct? If so then is it true that you had no problem with ex-HYIP players assisting with the Diligizer board? If that is true then does it boil down to you didn't approve of some posters recommending the services of others? What exactly do you see wrong with posters at the board recommending others? Do you have any proof that those being recommended took money without providing any services? Do you have any proof that those doing the recommending received compensation? It would be great if you could outline your concerns and what documentation or proof you have to warrant those concerns.

Until your post I wasn't aware that you knew so much about Daniel's past so am now confused about what are the issues. It appears I definitely had the wrong impression that you didn't think ex-HYIP players should be involved in running the board. My bad and will cross that off the list. Also I thought you wanted Tony removed from any involvement with board? Once again I thought that was in part due to his past but I must have misunderstood so will croos that off the list. I am now guessing that you don't want him involved in the board because you don't think he can provide services to investors who have lost funds? Is that correct?

Thanks and hopefully this exchange can remain nice, simple, and civil.

hunter


Anonymous
Posted: Friday, August 12, 2011

Posted: 9/4/2002 11:43:43 AM

By: Lisa Arden

While I have no idea what Daniel Wright's real role was in the case in point, I do know with certainty, that he was a "believer" in HYIP for over ten years, and pursued the "Holy Grail" with vigor. According to him, he finally stopped "believing" approximately 2.5 years ago.

He told me he went to Switzerland and England no less than 50 times in the late 80s and early to mid 90s in an attempt to find real "programs" or whatever the terminolgy was at that time.

He, under the pen/screen name Pied Noir wrote, in the first person, the excellent piece about the evolution of Prime Bank Instrument Fraud, that appeared on Diligizer on June 19, 2002 and can now be found permanently archived and referenced at the www.Treasury Scams.gov website:

"For another explanation by fraudsters of how this secret world works and a superb rebuttal to this explanation, click here(40K, pdf file, uploaded 06-20-02). For an explanation about the origin of Prime Bank Fraud, click here(20K, pdf file, uploaded 06-20-02). These documents were posted on the Diligizer Board on June 19, 2002."

In 1996, Daniel still believed such "investment" opportunites existed, and still was looking for the "real deal". This I unequivolcally know, because Daniel Wright told me so, and we discussed it numerous times over the course of the past year.


Again, what this means vis a vis the Burton/Andre/Westgate case, I do not know. I do know, however, that in 1996, Daniel was a "believer".


Anonymous
Posted: Friday, August 12, 2011

Posted: 9/5/2002 3:15:01 AM

By: I wasn't going to answer you , hunter, but, I changed my mind.

I am pretty sure you totally misunderstand me, and my real issues.

I respect your right not to care who is running a message board on which you choose to post. It would be equitable if you would afford me the same right/respect, to feel differently.

To me the whole thing COULD have been boiled down to one word -HYPOCRICY. Now I'm not so sure that's a big enough description, but on to the point.

If I had been introduced to the board with this description: We are a bunch of ex-believers, who have tangled with the law, and had serious financial problems, who have seen the light and now choose to do good to make reparations for the bad, and be smart to compensate for the stupid, and oh, by the way, we all make a living off fraud victims/potential victims one way or another vis a vis this message board we run, and we have a guy in the Treasury who works with us because he knows we really are good guys (even though some of us are trying to make a buck doing the unecessary (due diligence on HYIP) or usually un-doable, "asset recovery" (and always so unless one is credentialled)and aren't licensed as investigators even though the law mandates we must be, and we are going to put people on, or keep people off the "Black List" as we see fit, in line with undefined criteria, and we will allow people to advertise their services, and post their anonymous e-mail addresses and names to those searching, or already ripped off, AND we are going to tell readers of the board all of this instead of endlessly repeating the mantra of we are providing a [b]FREE[/b] service out of the goodness of our hearts.........................then, hunter, I might not even have had a problem at all, if the board was helping people. I still might have posted there, and been happy as a clam, and said "YES !! I want to join you in the Good Fight, no matter what, as you are being HONEST and UP-FRONT !!".

That, simply is not the case.

You may think what you choose, and do, I know, but to me, personal integrity and ethics are EVERYTHING. I simply do not believe in fighting fraud with fraud, and lies with more lies, just doesn't work for me. Two wrongs do not make a right.


Anonymous
Posted: Friday, August 12, 2011

Posted: 9/5/2002 12:15:18 AM

By: Typical Alp Response

Alp: "They are innocent because I say they are innocent; therefore, I was not wrong to associate with them."

Alp must not have gotten his message through to the SEC or the judge who slammed Bukovich and his co-swindlers in the Six Capital case.

Even funnier, Alp won't touch the statement of the Director of the Serious Fraud Office about Huck's scamming activities.

Alp calls everybody who disagrees with him "idiots" although his own supporters are a bunch of bankrupt losers who are dumb enough to believe in HYIPs. From time to time even Alp writes as if he has "the knowledge" of secret prime bank trades, which is probably just enough to keep his bankrupt and mindless wonders in tow.

"And that", sayeth Carl the assistant greenskeeper, "is all she wrote."


Anonymous
Posted: Friday, August 12, 2011

Posted: 9/4/2002 11:33:11 PM

By: Alp, I note you did not answer my questions. Would you please?



How WOULD you define Tony Bukovich's intent, Alp? (Relative to Six Capital".



"As far as making any money from the Diligizer Board. I have never made a penny from it, and never expected to."


Alp dear, you JUST said: "I DID advise Tony, and contemplate (and might still contemplate) doing business with him insofar as offering certain databases to financial institutions on a subscription basis.".


Here's the question, Alp:


SURELY you don't expect anyone to believe that a large part of the content of these databases does not come from postings on the DILIGIZER board, do you?


Anonymous
Posted: Friday, August 12, 2011

Posted: 9/4/2002 11:23:29 PM

By: Lisa Ann Arden


"You contradict yourself. You claim Huck "was in bed with Bukovich and Alp" and then you state that you never said Alp was in business with Bukovich."

No, I did not contradict myself. I said I didn't think you were in the >>>asset recoveryBukovich


"You claim that I made financial disclosure to certain people, and they did the same to me. You are misinformed, I never disclosed anything to anyone at any time, not did I receive any personal disclosures from anyone. What would've been the purpose?"


Because you were going into BUSINESS with each other.




"You claim that I received memos and sent replies from and to the Diligizer team. Yes, that much is true. So did you and many other people, There was no business involved."


NO Alp. You, Paul Renner, James Kramer-Wilt, Daniel, Tony Bukovich received and sent those internal Diligizer memos to each other only. Standard mailing list. Daniel FORWARDED a few to me, but they were not ADDRESSED to me. They were, to you.




"You claim that I was given data to post "to make me look informed". You've probably been speaking to someone as pie-eyed as yourself. I only twice posted information that I was given by someone asking me to post it, as they didn't want to post it under their known board name. As I recall, the information was merely factual data of no consequence to me, and certainly not likely to have the results you describe."


Not what I was told, but I can't prove otherwise. However, since BOTH James Kramer-Wilt (Claw, Alfie, Louie Two Fingers, DDGal,etc.) and Bukovich used MULTIPLE screen names, your explanation makes NO sense at all.



"All in all, you have elaborated a >>>>commercial and possibly criminal conspiracy

NO Alp. From a year of EVERY day involvement, and conveyance of information from James Kramer-Wilt, Daniel, "Mark Rogers", and gathering of empirical data, and information from others, and COMMON SENSE, and proof.




"... but it's all in your warped mind. I pity those that have seriously followed you down that delusional path, and have staked their reputations on the veracity of your "opinions"."


Some opinion, yes. But more, PROOF.


"Lastly, you keep making references to my character... that YOU, of ALL "people", could PRESUME to comment on ANYONE'S character, is... well it's obscene, really. Surely, even you must see that? I mean... come on! I could be an axe murderer, and you'd still be in no position to talk down to me! Apart from the fact that I find you repellent, evil, and altogether to be shunned (which is surely my God-given right!),

>>>>what is it that I have done, can you tell me?"

Not yet, but soon Alp, soon.






Anonymous
Posted: Friday, August 12, 2011

Posted: 9/4/2002 11:07:36 PM

By: last reply to the demented one

You contradict yourself. You claim Huck "was in bed with Bukovich and Alp" and then you state that you never said Alp was in business with Bukovich.

You claim that I made financial disclosure to certain people, and they did the same to me. You are misinformed, I never disclosed anything to anyone at any time, not did I receive any personal disclosures from anyone. What would've been the purpose?

You claim that I received memos and sent replies from and to the Diligizer team. Yes, that much is true. So did you and many other people, There was no business involved.

You claim that I was given data to post "to make me look informed". You've probably been speaking to someone as pie-eyed as yourself. I only twice posted information that I was given by someone asking me to post it, as they didn't want to post it under their known board name. As I recall, the information was merely factual data of no consequence to me, and certainly not likely to have the results you describe.

All in all, you have elaborated a commercial and possibly criminal conspiracy, from a few irrelevant facts, a few incorrect facts and a few outright lies... but it's all in your warped mind. I pity those that have seriously followed you down that delusional path, and have staked their reputations on the veracity of your "opinions".

Lastly, you keep making references to my character... that YOU, of ALL "people", could PRESUME to comment on ANYONE'S character, is... well it's obscene, really. Surely, even you must see that? I mean... come on! I could be an axe murderer, and you'd still be in no position to talk down to me! Apart from the fact that I find you repellent, evil, and altogether to be shunned (which is surely my God-given right!), what is it that I have done, can you tell me?

This is really what this is all about, that decent people will always reject you, eventually. But let me tell you Lisa, you cannot force people to like you. You can only try to become a little bit more likeable. I don't think you can, though.


Anonymous
Posted: Friday, August 12, 2011

Posted: 9/4/2002 10:39:19 PM

By: Lisa Ann Arden - One other thing, Alp.

I was told in no uncertain terms, many times, that Bukovich and James Kramer-Wilt GAVE YOU information to post on the message boards, to make you even more the knowledgable authority/guru figure.

Never once heard about you having, or giving, proprietary information to anyone else on the Diligizer "team".


 

Jump to different Forum... 

We hunt for red flags in high-value, cross-border finance by monitoring offshore and onshore courts, regulatory actions, offering documents, and other sources - and email you the results.

View Recent Digests

Cayman Court Secrecy: A Huge Red Flag for Foreign Investors & Clients
David Marchant
As any fule kno, the biggest enemy of fraud, corruption, money laundering, and other forms of financial crime is transparency, while their best friend is secrecy. That's why the unprecedented mass sealing of cases that's taking place at the Financial Services Division of the Grand Court of the Cayman Islands is repugnant to anyone with a genuine concern for financial crime.