News Focus
News Focus
icon url

HappyLibrarian

02/24/26 2:31 PM

#815762 RE: brooktrail1933 #815759

Not saying what he is describing is actually what is happening. However, it would seem such a mechanism, if plausible, would be a stroke of genius in terms of upending the manipulation and eventually sending the share price into orbit.
Given what we know about LP and her penchant for pulling rabbits out of hats at critical junctures, I personally would not put this, or something similar to it, past her.
So before everyone buries ILT under an avalanche of derision, let's see what happens when the 3% threshold he talks about is breached. If he's correct, then there are a few folks on this board who will be eating massive quantities of crow, and I would expect apologies to ILT to follow.
Just saying.



I won’t be eating crow even if ILT is proven 100% right.

In science and math, you are required to show your work and other scientists and mathematicians will need to replicate your findings before the paradigm is changed.

A scientist or mathematician who refuses to share their proofs and data for others to review and how they conducted their experiment will not be taken seriously and no one will feel foolish for having disregarded them even if they are proven right.

ILT is asking a bunch of investors who have been bruised and battered by false hope to believe them about extraordinary things and acts surprised and offended when these folks, who are well and truly tired of being jerked around demanding proof and maybe in a rough way.

I asked ILT for proof and failing that, the date by which what they say will be reflected in the real Saps in our accounts.

That’s a fair ask they declined and that decline rightly makes me more skeptical and so I am not eating crow if ILT made it hard for all of us to believe them but somehow turned out to not be scamming us.
icon url

Basilisk

02/24/26 2:48 PM

#815765 RE: brooktrail1933 #815759

Northwest would have to be the entity selling shares on the AIM, not MM's.

From Google, "The London Stock Exchange (LSE) established the Alternative Investment Market (AIM) in June 1995 as a junior, more flexible market to provide smaller, high-growth companies with access to capital, replacing the Unlisted Securities Market (USM). It was created to offer a regulated environment with lower compliance costs than the Main Market, catering to emerging businesses needing liquidity."

MM's selling to investors would not comply with the fundamental purpose of the AIM.

Further, why would Northwest henceforth sell any shares for $.24 on the OTC market if they can sell the same shares for $1.71 on the AIM? And yet Northwest apparently is.
icon url

learningcurve2020

02/24/26 3:09 PM

#815769 RE: brooktrail1933 #815759

By that if you mean somehow always getting authorized increases despite the poor performance, then yes. Otherwise what?

>>for pulling rabbits out of hats at critical junctures,
icon url

JerryCampbell

02/24/26 3:20 PM

#815773 RE: brooktrail1933 #815759

If it was possible to arbitrage trade buying nwbo at $0.24 OTC and selling at $1+ on LSE, would you be:

1) Ranting about it daily on social media?

2) Typing in new trades as fast as old trades clear making a fortune before anyone else figures out the trade?
icon url

Goats'nCrows

02/24/26 3:36 PM

#815776 RE: brooktrail1933 #815759

If LP set this amazing trap only to have ILT spill it all right here in supposed real time, then I guess there will be some crow to eat.
icon url

Baxers

02/25/26 4:18 AM

#815841 RE: brooktrail1933 #815759

I would be extremely happy to eat my words and apologise if I am wrong and ILTs LSE theory is correct. Until either his sovereign vault opens (or whatever it is that he expects to happen next) or he can provide one single shred of evidence to support his thesis then I am going to maintain that his theory is absolute nonsense! We have been listening to this waffle for over a month now and during that time not one single person has been able to verify one single thing that he has claimed and when pressed for evidence or one measly screenshot (or any verifiable proof at all) he claims that he couldn't possibly provide any due the flack he gets from his critics. Well, how about this for a suggestion, he would silence the likes of me and all his other critics in one fail swoop - and get the apology he would be due -, if he stops the garbled dramatised nonsense and provides some unequivocal evidence to back up ANY of his claims. Until then I will continue calling him out on every platform he is posting this on in order to prevent more actual longs from being led up his garden path and misinformed with this gobbledygook!