Friday, January 27, 2012

A Fake Interview?

Well I just listened to Breitling's response to the interview with John Jagerson.  He claimed that John was interviewing himself.  Not even close.  I never even met John online until a couple of weeks ago.  John is on record as having never bought dinar.  I am on record as having bought before I did adequate due diligence.  The fact is John doesn't need to interview himself.  He has posted a ton of stuff on his own website, a lot more than was included in this interview.  I just thought it might be nice to include an interview from somebody with his background along with the other interviews I've already conducted.  Many of my readers don't venture outside of the dinar forums very often so maybe they've never heard his perspective.

Another claim that Breitling made is that I am engaging in personal attacks.  Not true.  Everything I have posted on B in the past has been relevant to this investment.  I have never called him ugly, fat, stupid, or anything like that.  I did call him a douchebag but that's kind of the theme of this blog, ya know?  It's nothing personal.  It just means your conduct as a dinar "authority" needs improvement.  When I reveal a potential conflict of interest, or disprove statements made, or point out cases of flawed intel those aren't personal attacks.  That's just me being a watchdog for the dinar world. 

Something else that I find interesting is that B claims he got a ton of email from people ranting about that interview.  So far I have only received email from one person who took issue with what John said.  Odd, huh?
One final point.  John Jagerson offered to debate Breitling or any other guru on any number of topics.  Breitling apparently is declining this offer based on his claim that John (supposedly me) has been attacking people personally.  Now that I have set the record straight on this I wonder if B will reconsider?


  1. I would challenge "Breitling" to demonstrate where anyone was attacked personally. He's an anonymous internet personality, using a fake name. He claims to have received a "ton of e-mail" (*these ones*) yet I've never seen a legitimate e-mail address posted for him anywhere. Perhaps I've missed it? John Jagerson is easily identifiable with a long list of verifiable credentials. Who is Breitling, and what are HIS credentials supporting his providing financial advice on the IQD? Want to make money on an investment? Bet that Breitling will never agree to a debate with John Jagerson. His Friday radio show is so full of easily debunked misinformation and twisted facts it's difficult to imagine his having any listeners. Incidentally will Iraq reduce the number of Dinars in circulation from 25 "trillion" to 25 "billion" without a re-denomination (removing 3 zeros)?

  2. Breitling has lost his mind. He somehow claims the loppers are ignoring that Iraq says they will reduce the money supply from 25 trillion to 25 billion... and that somehow proves a lop wont happen. Have you ever heard a more ignorant statment in your life? That is a 99.99% reduction. There is absolutly no way at all to do that other than a 3 zero lop... and it's exacly what a 3 zero lop does.
    I almost get the feeling that Breitling doesn't even have a clue how a redenomination/lop works. His statements almost make it a sure thing he doesn't ynderstand hwo it works... unless he's intentionally trying to confuse people. which is a good possability.

  3. Breitling is off the mark in his accusations about a self sustained interview by Sam I am- and his person. If he stated that, the notion is funny at the very least.

    Where he is not "off the mark" is in terms of personal hit pieces by Sam I am. In fact, he is spot on. I've never seen any names like "ugly", "fat" or the like by Sam I am. However, let's be clear in all accounts; The name of the Blog alone is a pejoritive indictment on select individuals. Thus by naming Breitling, Montana and others in his hit pieces, there is unmistakable implication, and name calling lacking no subtlety...

    IF "Sam I am" refuses to acknowledge this then he is either not being truthful with himself about his implications and the intent of his hit pieces or is being......." disingenuous " at best.

    As I have stated previously, Sam I am or anyone else is entitled to choose to speak as they wish- sort of. However the consequences of those actions are not theirs to choose in kind... Believe that, because apparently the chickens are coming home to roost in both trees.

    The ladder ALWAYS goes both ways. Like it or not

    1. Duke, the name of the site was chosen to be provocative I'll admit. Many people have told me they get a kick out of reading The Douchies. But like I said, I haven't attacked anybody personally regarding things that aren't relative to the dinar. When gurus spread misinformation about this investment I call them on it. The term "douchebag" is just the literary device I've chosen for doing that.

      When I see somebody pumping lower denoms and then I identify them and show a connection between them and a dinar dealer running promotions featuring lower denoms that is not a personal attack. It's simply a matter of pointing out something that investors should take into consideration as it adds context to what that pumper is doing. When I point out that a pumper has a criminal background that is also relevant. When I state that pumpers have a background in MLM rather than investment analysis that is information that I would look for as an investor. Trust me, I have been given plenty of information on gurus and pumpers that I could publish, but I don't because it's not relevant. If I wanted to engage in personal attacks I could, but I have chosen to only address information that is relevant and verifiable. If my style is a bit harsh at times that's too bad. But I'm at a loss as to why I am the focus of your criticism in light of all of the information I have pointed out over the past four months about what is going on here. I suppose I could precede every response to every idiotic $7 RV prediction with "I respectfully disagree" but somehow I just don't see that it would have the same impact or even come across as genuine.

      I have established that Angela Dorman from the Treasury Vault is the wife of Dinar Daddy owner Roger Dorman. I have proven a working relationship between Roger and Breitling. I have provided links to the backgrounds of Dan Atkinson, TonyTNT, Frank Villa, and Jack DeAngelis. I have shown that Adam Montana claims to be a Harvard grad married to a CPA and now we see that he can't do basic math and that he was a mod at Med's forum some three years ago, along with a ton of other information that I think is quite relevant to investors. I have offered people information on what true revaluations and redenominations look like, and shown how the pumpers and gurus are distorting the statements coming out of Iraq.

      I started this blog after my own research led me to understand the extent of the fraud and misinformation perpetrated with the dinar. I wanted to help other people avoid the mistake that I made. Some readers have written me and thanked me for the service that I'm providing. If you think I'm no better than the frauds and posers I'm addressing then I guess I'll just have to live with that.

  4. Ordinarily, I would agree with your premise, DukeNukEm. But in this particular instance, the evidence has been piling up for years, to the point where it is now virtually overwhelming. Sam has clearly done his homework, as have others, and while there is some intended humor presented in the name of the site and its awards, the concept itself is solidly supported by facts in evidence, and I haven't seen a single case where a reasonable argument can be made against the justification for issuance of one of these "douchies." If someone would like to present a case in opposition, I'm quite certain that Sam, or any one of a number of others can easily demonstrate ample convincing evidence to refute any claim of unjustified criticism. It is noteworthy that not a single recipient has come forward in an effort to refute any claim made on this site, and none have agreed to debate the issue at hand. These people have clearly lied, not once, but repeatedly. Once can be seen as an error in judgement, twice might be seen as ignorance, but multiple instances, and in many cases "hundreds," undeniably demonstrates absolute intent. It's long past time that people should begin filing complaints with their respective local, State or Federal law enforcement and prosecutorial agencies requesting a formal investigation into the actions of these individuals. This may ultimately be determined to be one of the largest, if not THE largest fraud ever perpetrated in terms of the number of victims and monetary amounts involved. The final outcome of the status of the IQD remains to be determined, (though it seems pretty clear to most experts) but the fact that fraudulent acts have been committed by these individuals is indisputable. Thousands of pages of internet chats and posts on multiple internet websites demonstrate that fact way beyond reasonable doubt.

    1. Legolas, "may" is the same as "might" in this case. Neither of which is pause or justification for any legally productive action at this point. Unless Sam I am, you or anyone else believes frivolous lawsuits are a productive vehicle in society wherein lawyers win again...

      By your own words the evidence to this point is circumstantial due to the pending outcome of this issue. Furthermore in terms of dollars , guess again. Especially when weighing the licensed fraud of Enron and MF Global. Collectively those two entities absconded with hundreds of billions of OPM without much recourse less attorney's fees of course.

      At least here people "should" be able to recoup @ 70% of their money with minimal effort. IF they cannot, then this not only draws in the "pumpers" to a minor degree but primarily the banks like 5th 3rd and all dealers. THose are the real parties of culpability.

      In any case, stating that the Dinar is the largest perpetrated fraud is just a tad melodramtic in light of the real facts. Large perhaps, pending some projected outcomes. However, since the book is still open and the outcome uncertain, fraud will be a difficult charge to prove in many if not most cases.

      In any case, Sam I am or perhaps someone on this blog should lead by example and initiate the proceedings IF they feel the conviction their comments suggest.

      Consider it a "put up or shut up" proposition.

      Good Luck

    2. "At this point" I was speaking more in terms of criminal rather than civil proceedings. There is a great deal of work to be done before it can be determined what charges could be filed and against whom. Enron and MF Global are "apples and oranges" to this situation. Although vastly different, this is more similar to the Madoff case, and involves a great deal more money. Calling it HUGE is hardly melodramatic. Off the top of my head, I can't think of a larger similar situation, and certainly none involving so many perpetrators and victims. Even Enron and MF Global were small in terms of complexity and scope.

      Your estimate of a 70% recovery of investment is extremely overly optimistic. Most investors have "already" paid at least 20%, and in more recent times, 40% over face value for their IQD - some even more. The exchange fees to convert back to US Currency are currently at least 20% of face value, and will very likely be MUCH higher if there is no substantial RV, and IF there is even anyone in country willing to make that exchange in the future. This makes the losses "at least" 40%, and probably more like 60% if not greater. A total loss is not out of the question, depending on the ultimate outcome.

      The banks bear absolutely no liability in this situation. They provide exchange services for "all" foreign currencies as a customer service for foreign travelers, and have done so for many years. Most have specifically "stopped" the exchange of the IQD due to the rumors and speculation, having tired of the non-stop phone calls and ridiculous questions from naive customers. They made no representation as to the potential "investment value of the IQD." The dealers, pumpers and website owners are an entirely different issue. They have implied, to varying degrees, and with drastic changes in wording over time, that the Dinar will dramatically increase in value, (as much as 800,000%) creating windfall profits for "investors." Some have become far more conservative in their claims, but a review of "historical" data from their sites will reveal those changes, making it very apparent that they became aware of liability.
      Some have even shut down their websites and businesses, but this won't necessarily protect them from future legal action.

      An investigation will be very costly and time consuming, involving search warrants, subpoenas, countless interviews, review of tens of thousands of pages of chats, posts, e-mails, banking and phone records, etc. involving interstate and even international activities of literally hundreds of potential suspects. This may or may not ultimately transpire, but doesn't change the fact that it's already more than justified based on currently available evidence. Only time will tell, but I think it's safe to say that tens of thousands of investors will revert from "praising" their internet idol gurus to calling for their collective heads on a platter when things don't work out the way they believe they were "promised."

    3. Your opinion is valid and it is reasonable. However IF you are impying that investors have transferred hundreds of billions toward purchase of the Dinar, like Hedge Funds did into Enron, and associations did into MF Global guess again. That doesn't even take into account private individual stock purchases from Enron. Perceptions, I suppose, but the figures on Enron and MF Global are verifiable.

      Regardless , banks will be held accountable by certain parties just for selling it. In conjunction with the fact that they essentially admitted mea culpa when they stopped selling it.

      In either case the percentage of loss- IF any is yet to be realized because the book is not yet closed.

      So I stand by my comments. Sam I am or anyone else should lead by example and put teeth in to what amounts to only an expressed conviction.

    4. Correction: I should hve stated 10's of billions, not 100's for both Enron and MFG.

      THe fact is 4 years prior to bankruptcy investors only lost a paltry 74 billion. Although the company was fraudulently estimated at over 138 billion. Of course tht doesn't count legal fees in prosecution by the complicit gov't or any other associated expenses.

      MFG is only charged with absconding a pittance in an est 1.2 billion . Although there are further charges thathte auditors are cooking the books.

      Go figure...

    5. Correct to a degree, Duke. First, when I referred to the comparison to Enron and MFG, I was speaking in terms of "numbers of perpetrators" and "numbers of victims." Both are hundreds of times larger in this situation. The total dollar value is unknown, but I suspect it's in the tens of billions based on what I've seen thus far - could be higher. Cost of litigation in this case will be MUCH higher, due to the scope - possibly even prohibitively higher. I suspect that there will be "no" law firms with the financial or investigative resources to handle a case of this magnitude, involving 50 States, hundreds of potential defendants and tens of thousands of victims - particularly given the fact that there may be little "recoverable" in damages. It will fall on government entities, and would be an overwhelming endeavor.

      I think the losses are nearly "guaranteed" at this point, but you're right, it's not over till it's over - meanwhile the dealers and pumpers keep raking it in. I still say that the banks will bear no liability. Regardless of their reason for cessation of sales, they made no representations, and sold the IQD as they do every other currency in the world. Personally I believe they stopped selling for reasons of the incredible annoyance factor and concern for their customers once they did some research of their own. No one will recover a dime from a bank, if anywhere else.

      In terms of "expressed convictions," I suspect that many are already gathering evidence. There certainly is plenty to be had. :)

  5. "Another claim that Breitling made is that I am engaging in personal attacks. Not true."

    Actually Sam I Am you are in fact engaging in personal attacks amidst your self professed, public service, philanthropy campaign. THere are perhaps folks on this blog gullible enough to believe that , but the facts are quite different. Such as your own self indicting words.

    Furthermore if yourcontradictory statement here:

    "I did call him a douchebag but that's kind of the theme of this blog, ya know?"

    is your justification, perhaps you should have someone proof your comments before posting. That would be in order to mitigate your myopically induced contradictions. For example that would be akin someone saying...

    "Yes, sure I shot that guy with my firearm, because he asked for it. Beside that I have my CCW..." License doesn't always mean justification.

    The over arching fact here is you may be self proclaimed "watch-dog", but clearly , others are watching you.

    It would be wise to keep this in mind.


Please keep your comments civil and respectful. No namecalling, insults, or accusations against other participants. Do not post phone numbers or addresses.