The unfair dtc restrictions need to be removed by

The unfair dtc restrictions need to be removed by following reportedly dictatorial dtc's due process late 2013 white papers ( reportedly an influence by congress on dtc to return to the rule of law rather than their reported politically directed unconstitutional taking of companies stock due to no fault of or prior notice to some co's,let alone our own)

Brad needs to get off the pot or turn this over to someone who can get er done-and he has a legal responsibility to keep us informed-

He inherited an established mine, though ships were blocked due to port games,but CWRN won that lawsuit against the port just after Bob sold to Brad,which is why the Ilia shipped

Latin America is 1 of the lowest cost mining jurisdictions (China's wages have exceeded Mexico's wages for ca 2 years now) and w lower shipping costs now and premiums from lump ore it is still possible to make a decent profit- iron was only 10-14 til 2002 and didn't reach this price til 2008 (apparently without current premiums for lump ore)

take advantage of the rapid politically liberal USA west coast growth of organic gardening and organic fert (which is not limited to just liberal politics anymore)- which is reportedly worth far more than iron/ton now-see Bingos 9-8-12 post.

utilize the ca 7 million revenue from the Ilia -less ship costs- and if the bank stole that (the only theory I have on why everything stopped) sue the bank- as would be Brads responsibility on CWRN's behalf- otherwise he would be in collusion w the bank to defraud stockholders, but I've never seen any evidence, despite all our dd, of any such suit.


Since all of my (and many others) communications to Brad have been returned as undeliverable for a long time:

at least communicate with us Brad-most holders have not even been able to get a communication through to you for a long time.
Some want to sue over the lack of communication alone. Communication with stockholders is a legal responsibility -something your bevy of lawyers may not tell you because they are not representing the stockholders.

There is a trend for responsible companies to have stockholder representation on the board itself-and why not - stockholders own the company.

If this were an SEC reporting co,material events would have to be reported within ca 24-72 hours.

We haven't officially heard anything since the hurriedly written confusing May 2013 PR-which was fodder for bashers. Stonewalling holders til you commit bankruptcy or whatever you are doing will not help you in the end. How long can anybody hold back the tides?

You already know that in the absence of communication people tend to believe /suspect the worse,especially in politically shell shocked pennies since Sept 2009-and this time the worst may be the reality.

What is the downside to communicating? Such communication is not going to help holders sue somebody in bankruptcy if thats what is occurring,since we are unsecured creditors,who are always raped in bankruptcy and will have those rights whether you communicate or not,and so given the legal responsibility to keep the owners informed, why not do so????

Nobody knows of any logical reason for 2 plus years lack of official communication- I defended the silence for many months because there were possible logical security reasons in Mexico for such for a few months but not after a few months. It will not help your resume.
As even the most hopeful have said, at least tell us what you can and tell us why you cant say more.