Well, they aren't vague about everything. They are pretty specific about the 100's of millions of shares being converted and issued at .0001.
They are pretty vague about the who what and wheres of the opperations
Q2 June 30, 2013 Shares issued from debt conversions 121,000,000 $12,100 These shares were converted at .0001 page 5 www.otcmarkets.com/financialReportViewer?symbol=NWGC&id=109865
Q3 September 30, 2013 Shares issued from debt conversions 191,000,000 $19,100 These shares were converted at .0001 page 5 www.otcmarkets.com/financialReportViewer?symbol=NWGC&id=113217
This is a misstatement of facts. The business consultant only assisted Mr. Talbert create the financial statements. There is no indication that the business consultant is a CPA and thus can not provide an attest opinion as to the material correctness of the financial filings. In fact, if he is assisting management develop the financial statements, he is not independent and thus can't provide an attest opinion.
Further, the Lawyer is only providing an opinion that the information provided meets the minimum standards required under Rule 144(c)(2). The minimum standard is that he look at the information that was provided to him and it looks like the documents could be correct and they are the type of documents you would normally see provided.