Good evening NT300

I'll just respond with some thoughts that I've been dwelling on these past few days.

First of all, I do not follow Stockhouse. Agoracom and Stockigloo are the reputable sites where sensible and respectfull commentary takes place. These two sources of info have hub leaders who are involved as investors of the company and have a stake in the quality of information that is presented.... while at the same time not censoring what we say...... just keeping us on track. I think the quality of commentator is above average on Agoracom and Stockigloo and credible.

The 'NO' campaign is much stronger than it would appear. I say this on the basis of how fast Stockigloo initiated the tables and survey so that we had a good idea of our strength in the "NO" vote. In addition the participants in the two sites are sharing between ourselves. It is obvious when a Stockhouse source enters our venues just by the way they present themselves.

One item I'm considering is what will happen to Daniel Major and his cohorts when their manipulation is rejected by a "NO" vote. To me he is no longer acceptable as a Leader of this company. He has so destroyed his credibility and trust (within 32 days) not only with us but with the institutional investment community and Banks that he has to be removed at the first opportunity....and I think he now knows it or will get the message as we approach the May 12 vote.

And then there is the question of Max Finskiy. The only thing he has going for him is his money. He has also destroyed his integrity, credibility and our trust. Ways are going to have to be found to remove him from the scene. He, of his own making, has destroyed his reputation in Canada. My advice to him would be to accept defeat in a gracious manner ..... recoup your investment in an ethical manner with nobody getting hurt and we all move on with a handshake.

We then move on to build CMM into the company that it can be and was intended to be.

I'm also giving thought to the disposition of the Board of Directors. Their fate is similar to those mentioned above.

Then there are the other insiders and one that comes to mind is Richard Meschke. In a legal and advisory position he also, while a previous mainstay of the company, has been working against the Shareholders (except for a selected few) and worked to thwart any attempts that we have initiated. Can Richard Meschke stay after a successful "NO" vote? Richard should be reviewing what is in his best personal interest and what is in the company's shareholders interest. I'm going to suggest that they are becoming conflicted.

We all have much to think about. First things first, the "NO" forces have got to continue to grow, and they are, in order to defeat this Merger Proposal.

Much to think about..... with 33 days to put our "NO" house in order.