That said your not stating that in your 1st statement in this thread (That their merely IOU's). That's a form of either fraud, or gross misrepresentation. A criminal offense if I recall correctly concerning financial instruments

But then you just merely overlooked that correct??? And you didn't mean to misrepresent correct?
*rant*
I only chimed in here because someone wasn't representing what is merely IOU's. And not the real underlining assets. Leaving that part out of the equation is absolutely unforgivable.
Uhm, any Bitcoin exchange listed on
http://bitcoincharts.com/markets/ (except direct face 2 face transactions for cash on localbitcoins) in fact do NEVER deal with pure BTC trades, ONLY with IOUs. Did you post there too, that these are not in fact BTC and they are fraudilent or grossly misrepresenting facts on their website? BTC IOU volume is orders of magnitudes larger in amount of currency and amount of transactions than volume on Bitcoin (the block chain) itself and has been for years now. This is true for Altcoins too by the way, any account balance you do not have in your wallet but on a website like Cryptsy or Bitstamp is an "IOU", not connected in any way to what you understand as "Bitcoin", "Litecoin" or "USD" other than your trust to be able to redeem this value some time in the future.
Go on and tell me how you purchased ALL of your *coins only via mining or cash transactions, because anything else did involve IOUs (of your bank, of your exchange, of your escrow agent...).

Edit:
e.g.
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=453295.msg4994968#msg4994968 - you do NOT state that the BTC and all other currencies deposited there are in fact IOUs. Are you a fraud?!
To quote you again, because it perfectly fits:
That said your not stating that in your 1st statement in this thread (That their merely IOU's). That's a form of either fraud, or gross misrepresentation. A criminal offense if I recall correctly concerning financial instruments

But then you just merely overlooked that correct??? And you didn't mean to misrepresent correct?
*rant*
I only chimed in here because someone wasn't representing what is merely IOU's. And not the real underlining assets. Leaving that part out of the equation is absolutely unforgivable.
From what you just stated it makes it obvious to all you too, just misstated the facts. Not myself. I am not the one 'ranting'. And I am not the ones misrepresenting anything.
You now maliciously RANT my statements of FACT.
Now I will admonish your misrepresentation of the facts.
Exchanges hold the REAL ASSETS, of their clients. Let their clients trade them. Then later distribute them back to their clients. Only one entity must be trusted in this case; the Exchange.
Where as on Ripple there are at a minimum of two Gateways that must be trusted, and that's at a minimum, to get the real underlying asset cleared and home. And that's in the best case situation. If one extends any trust elsewhere on the Ripple Network then suddenly one can be held fully liable for any of those trusted and their failure to own up to those IOU's.
So no, your full of it. And yes, your the one ranting and misrepresenting.
No. I wont bother anymore. I just gutted you, so to speak. Clearly you have a conflict of interest.
But it would be wise to stop misrepresenting the Ripple Network. And not to misrepresent what it's competitors are either. Otherwise the law suits may really start flying, and blowing back at those that
think their above reproach.
Caveat emptor