Replies to post #24870 on MSB Global Capital Corp. (MSBM)

[righty]

No i do believe you are misconstruing a few things here.

To clarify, some time ago it was brought to the board that state officials had positively asserted the fact that water and the removal thereof was an issue in granting permits necessary for mining the rage claims. In short it would cause lenghty delays and red tape for permits, to be granted.

Some folks on the board contacted berman for further clarifiaction, and basically were told that this was incorrect.

It was then insinuated per berman, as per makesumgravy that this was fraudulent.

John's document from susan white clearly refutes both of those theories and places questions on the statements by berman on both matters. More to the point it raises the fact that dewatering was and possibly still is an issue, at least it was in so far as much as it caused rsds to amend their noi.

Time to stop blasting the messenger here, john explained why he hesitated to post, giving berman a chance to come clean.

Time to put the questions to your ceo man, clearly he is the one needs to answer some questoins at this point.

By the way folks as I posted in earlier DD, this dewatering issue can still rear it's head come time to mine, and even is still possible prior to drilling.

[JohnIraq]

Hi Loof,

This CEO is in possession of an awful lot of good peoples hard earned money Loof... I've never been big on blind faith, his statements and actions should be examined, its quite a legitimate course of action to take for a Pink Sheet stock... If you are looking for agendas... I fear there are others on this board with far more interesting stories to tell than I, it would be interesting to know if we actually have individuals posting on this board who are working hand in hand with Mr.Berman... don’t you think?

I held back this information because I was waiting for confirmation of what I'd heard... trying to be responsible with the information I'd uncovered rather than running off at the mouth... I'm sure you can appreciate that... the following excerpt is taken from a post I sent to JCMoney on June 15th which provides an oblique reference to this issue:

Posted by: JohnIraq
In reply to: JCMoney who wrote msg# 20493

Date:6/15/2007 1:03:36 AM
Post # of 24881


The Notice of Intention for an Exploratory Mining Permit from US Forest Service was submitted on or around the 10th of May, information relating to the submission of that Notice of Intention was provided by Joel Nowak (UF Forest Service). There are additional details and an opinion pertaining to the state of an existing mine on this claim, but I am not going to divulge those details until they are corroborated by a separate State agency who may potentially have a role to play prior to the Feds issuing this permit.

I posted yesterday for two reasons, the first is that Item 4, in the letter at the foot of yesterdays post further confirms the information I had previously received. Secondly and more importantly, the CEO (according to Makes) is denying flat out that a dewatering issue ever existed, which leads me to another of your points...


Also isn't this conjecture and YOUR opinion and how is this DD? ---
"if Makes earlier post is an accurate reflection of Mr. Bermans opinion... unfortunately it seems we cannot hold Mr.Berman to that same standard as he only posts his opinons in relation to this issue to selected Board participants by e-mail, and with the safety net of a confidentiality clause... how convenient...).

Makes is the lead board Moderator, so it seems reasonable to presume that he attempts to ensure that his posts are accurate when they relate to issues concerning Mr. Berman and his opinion. With that in mind he has posted the following...

Posted by: makesumgravy
In reply to: JohnIraq who wrote msg# 24713 Date:7/17/2007 4:01:23 PM
Post #of 24846

Do you have all this documentation?. According to Berman you and righty don't know what you are talking about.

Budget went on for weeks stating there was a 505 and 506 in place without proof to back this up.

So if you are going makes such statements it would be to everyones benefit to present the goods. Berman has already addressed this issue with several people and has stated that righty was wrong and now you are bringing up the same issues.

I am not a mining expert but I read documents. Utah has been very very dry so where the water comes in to play I have no idea?.........But the fires have done alot of damage to forest areas.



Posted by: makesumgravy
In reply to: None

Date:7/18/2007 10:51:48 AM
Post # of 24883



Excerpt from RB. Answers to 2 questions. I cannot post a confidential e-mail response but this I can.

How may remember how this board was pounded for weeks regarding the first issue......This was proven without a doubt from the TA that a 505 and 506 was not filed nor had been. The 504 was completed on 5/31/07. As of yesterdays date the numbers are the same.

This dewartering issue has been the 2nd thing to surface.


From RB:
Reference regarding 504, 505, 506 & dewatering being a problem.

I think any reasonable person would agree that someone who knowingly posts a falsehood is committing a fraud.


He has also mentioned that in copying these kind of post that he may submit them to the Nasd....


It’s common knowledge that Mr.Berman uses a confidentiality disclaimer at the foot of his e-mails and this has been cited as the reason for not posting facts in the past, but Makes seems to make it clear that privately, a number of individuals on this board have been told that those articulating this issue are wrong, further that they are committing a fraud… that’s strong language, especially as the letter from The State Division of Oil Gas and Minerals seems to contradict his assertion.

I try to stick to fact and avoid speculation whenever possible Loof, you and others are free to read my posts and take it or leave it, each to their own.