MSB Global Capital Corp. (MSBM)

[righty]

I just received some correspondence from US Forestry, regarding the confusion surrounding the drilling that has already taken place on the Rage Claims.

It would seem my suspicions were correct, and that this drilling should not have taken place. The good news is US forestry has accepted RSDS's reasoning for the improper work that took place.

Now before I lay this out, I would just like to say two things.

1-I resent that I had to obtain this explanation from US Forestry, the CEO should have come forward and explained this matter some time ago, this should serve as an example of the confusion his silence is creating. If you all recall it was the CEO Richard Berman, himself, who made comments earlier this year trying to discourage people from contacting government officials with regards to obtaining information regarding these projects.

WELL MR. BERMAN, GIVE IT A REST! THIS IS NOW THE SECOND TIME YOU HAVE BY WAY OF SHEER NEGLECT, LEFT YOUR OWN SHAREHOLDERS NO CHOICE BUT TO DO EXACTLY THAT TO CHECK ON THE PROGRESS, AND WHAT HAVE WE FOUND OUT AGAIN?????

2-I am very annoyed,(although relieved no disciplinary action is to be taken), yet VERY ANNOYED that our investment monies are being managed by such a careless group of people to have allowed the following to happen.

This could very well have jeopardized completion of this exploration within this year.

As it is, it is going to be close enough, we do NOT need any of these mistakes.

Imagine what could have happened had US Forestry taken a different view of this event.

In my opinion this event amounts to nothing less than gross mismanagement in the conduct or control of the companies affairs.

I find it difficult to believe the story presented to US Forestry, but at this time and for the sake of keeping the peace, I will not disregard it.

I have only one thing to add, and that is a hearty thankyou to the good people at US Forestry, for providing an outlet for the shareholders to get to the truth, and sadly the information our CEO could have provided, after all it shows exhuberance and a desire to get er done!
-------------------------------------------------------------
First My Letter to US Forestry

Dear Mr. Nowak.

On October the 5th, 2007 your office posted a document
to your website called:

DECISION MEMO
RAGE CLAIMS URANIUM EXPLORATION
Manti-La Sal National Forest
Moab/Monticello Ranger District
San Juan County, Utah

For reference it can be found at:

http://www.fs.fed.us/r4/mantilasal/projects/projects_moabmonticello/rage/decision.pdf

My inquiry stems from the following information,

Russel Industries press released the following item on
August 31, 2007. Wherein they stated

"Further, Russell Industries is pleased to announce
that it has received approval for its Plan of
Operations regarding uranium exploration on its Rage
Claims within the Monticello Ranger District of San
Juan County Utah. The Company plans to begin drilling
in this claim range in September."

press release is below

August 31, 2007 - 7:03 AM EST

http://app.quotemedia.com/quotetools/popups/story.jsp

Russell Industries Field Report
Layne Berman and Tony Brandt representing Russell
Industries, Inc. (Pink Sheets:RSDS) report that on
August 29, an independent uranium drill logging
company contracted by the company began the initial
step in the process of quantification on the first ten
holes drilled on its Cache claims in Utah’s Lisbon
Valley. Using Gamma technology, the preliminary
results indicate that certain quantities of uranium
were indeed found. To confirm these findings using
alternate methodology, core samples taken from the
tailings of the drilled holes are being sent to an
independent laboratory for assay. Preliminary field
analysis of these tailings indicates such
mineralization as to suggest a reasonable probability
that uranium is present in the area.

Further, Russell Industries is pleased to announce
that it has received approval for its Plan of
Operations regarding uranium exploration on its Rage
Claims within the Monticello Ranger District of San
Juan County Utah. The Company plans to begin drilling
in this claim range in September. "August was a very
busy month for us and we will continue to follow our
strategic plan for the remainder of 2007. We have
further defined our business model as staking,
claiming, permitting, drilling and selling proven and
probable reserves," said Rick Berman, President and
CEO.

In addition to this press release Russell Industries
subsequently released another press release on
September 25th 2007.

Wherein the following was stated:

"The Company has also sent core samples from its Rage
Claims located in Utah's Elk Ridge, to be assayed and
anticipates the results to be issued before the end of
September. "

link below
http://app.quotemedia.com/quotetools/popups/story.jsp

Mr. Nowak, unless I am "missing the boat" here I am a
little confused as to how Russell Industries was able
to press release these developments, if in fact,
from the looks of what you put on your website,
approvals to drill those core samples were not yet in
place.

The ceo of Russell Industries has optioned not to
comment on these matters, and Sir, as a shareholder in
Russell Industries, I am hoping you can alleviate my
obvious concerns.

Are the claims the company has made in it's press
releases possible?

Could they have engaged in drilling on the Rage
claims, prior to your issuing the decision memo on
October 5th 2007, without breeching the US Forestry
regulations affecting them?

Thank you for your consideration.
--------------------------------------------------------------

The response

Date: Mon, 15 Oct 2007 13:31:19 -0600

Dear Sir,

It's true that we just approved the operations on Forest. The company explained to me that they thought they were approved from the Forest Service when they received approval from the Utah Division of Oil Gas and Mining. With UDOGM's approval they proceeded to drill three holes on
Forest land. When we were notified they were drilling, we stopped them immediately. It's in my opinion they misunderstood the proper authorizations that were needed to begin operations.

So, yes they did drill three of the 27 holes proposed and now approved.
With this approval though, there are restrictions that allow drilling in certain conditions and during certain times of the year. Some of the specific restrictions are spelled out in the Decision Memo appendix located
on the website you indicated. If any of these restrictions are not abided by, we will take action and among other things, cease operations. We are not going to take action on the three unauthorized holes as we believe they
were genuinely mistaken.

Let me know if this answers your question. Thanks,

Joel Nowak
Natural Resource Specialist
Lands/Special Uses/Minerals/Roads
Moab/Monticello District
Manti-La Sal National Forest
[phone]