CMKX Owners Group

[sandi66]

Subject: Update 7/20/2005
From: [e-mail]
Date: Wed, 20 Jul 2005 16:05:14 -0700

FRIZZELL LAW FIRM
305 S. Broadway, Suite 302
Tyler, Texas 75702
[phone]
E-Mail [e-mail]

Dear Group Members, July 20, 2005

My apologies for this delay between updates. I had a rather urgent matter to come up in Houston that caused me to be out of the office part of Monday and all of Tuesday. (I have not yet gone to Canada or Equador) John has given me an extended list of matters that he would like me to comment on in an update. I cannot address all of them at this time. I will give you an update before I leave the office on Friday that should provide information on most of the pending concerns he has brought to my attention. I will give further explanation about Phase 2 in that update.

I am continuing to get assurances from Don Stoecklein that Brad Beckstead is making progress on the audits. Is there a shareholder among you that has audit experience that would agree to act as a monitor on a bi weekly basis? I am going to ask that our monitor be allowed to communicate directly with Mr. Beckstead so we can have some assurance that there is in fact progress on our financials. I am very much aware of prior audit work that Mr. Beckstead has done for some related entities. It would be prudent for us to follow the firm’s progress at this point.

I have no news to report on the status of our settlement proposal. The SEC attorneys have initiated the steps for submitting our proposal to the commission. There is no set time frame for a response. I have not received word that the Commission has actually received our proposal, but it is my understanding that the SEC attorneys have begun the submission process. I will report to you any discussions about settlement between the company and the SEC as soon as I hear of the same.

The Petition For Review (the name of the appeal documents) preparation has begun. I have offered my assistance in the preparation of the Petition but I have been assured that this document is being prepared. I have asked to review any rough drafts and I expect I will receive the same when the Petition is nearing its final form.

Thanks to some really good due diligence by some of your own members we have amassed quite a book on some people involved in this company aside from Urban Casavant. There have clearly been trading irregularities in the last two years. In my opinion there has been clear market manipulation of this stock. This manipulation was also brought on in part by some of the individuals that received large amounts of this stock in the last two years. I cannot reveal the names at this point for rather obvious reasons. I am still in need of certain information before I can suggest any appropriate action at this time. The investigation into these individuals have consumed an inordinate amount of time but this work is very important. Much more to come on Friday afternoon.

Onward,

Bill

[sandi66]

Subject: Update 7/22/2005
From: [e-mail]
Date: Fri, 22 Jul 2005 12:46:25 -0700

FRIZZELL LAW FIRM
305 S. Broadway, Suite 302
Tyler, Texas 75702
[phone]
E-Mail [e-mail]

Dear Group Members, July 22, 2005

Audit Monitoring

Many thanks to those who have responded to my call for accounting/auditing assistance. I am comforted in knowing that I can always count on this group when a need arises. If you have auditing or accounting experience and wish to participate, please put together a brief resume/business profile and send it to [e-mail], I would greatly appreciate it. I am not inspecting for style points here. This is for my eyes only. I will most likely ask one of you to be the official inquirer. I would like to have an unofficial committee composed of the remainder of you who have expressed a desire to help. Asking the right questions at this time could be very helpful to our cause. I do not want the company to have any doubts that we are more than just concerned about the progress of this audit. Depending on the size of the committee we might arrange a private room on the internet to share ideas for confirming the progress of the audit. Maybe a list of inquiry areas can be provided to the designated inquirer before each “review session”. I will be asking Mr. Stoecklein for his agreement to our monitoring once I have received this requested information. He has already agreed in principal but wants to review the specifics of my request. I would like to discuss this with Mr. Stoecklein on Monday so get any resumes/profiles headed this way.

Phase I Accounting

John has asked me to do a general accounting of the proceeds received from Phase I. Beginning the first week of April, John posted the original agreement asking for a $25 contribution from shareholders to have representation in the administrative proceeding. We also began the process of gathering shareholder information to help determine the number of outstanding shares of company stock. My representation per this agreement concluded on July 12, 2005 when Judge Murray handed down her decision.

Approximately 5,700 shareholders joined the group. 4,300 members made a $25.00 contribution. There were a few that contributed more than $25.00. Contributions totaled approximately $107,000.

Travel Expenses - Washington, D.C. (three days, two nights) Las Vegas (three days, two nights) Los Angeles (four days, three nights)

$4,000

Labor Costs - At the height of the shareholder information gathering, additional office staff (much of it through a temp agency) was needed to gather, collate and input shareholder documents. As many as 15 people were being paid hourly for a couple of weeks. This includes investigators, consulting attorney fees, and added clerical help since April 1, 2005.

$25,000

Supplies - The fax in program exceeded the cost estimate significantly. Many shareholder statements were faxed more than once. Many people faxed to the wrong fax machine causing us to refax to the dedicated fax lines. Emailed statements required us to printout from our computer and then fax the documents into the dedicated fax system. We have gathered, filed and stored over 200,000 pages of shareholder information. Toner cartridges, fax paper, etc…. An individual paper file was opened on each shareholder (5,700). (We are now relying on digital files). File folders, labels, etc. I am also including the mailing expenses (postage) associated with the fax in campaign.

$12,000

Hardware, Software and Technical Assistance - To record and document the shareholder information, we hired several computer savvy people to design a system that would allow us to receive a fax and automatically convert it to a digital file. We wanted each document to be imprinted with an identifying file number when it was received so we could locate the document for verification purposes. Then we created a database designed to receive summary information of the documents so we could print out a summary of the shareholders statements once the process was complete. This database was designed so that we can sort by broker, shareholder or by ID#. We are now able to access all documents sent in by the shareholders by name search or ID# and we can readily display the supporting documents. A state of the art commercial fax machine was purchased to accommodate the expected volume of incoming documents. Four computers were purchased and four rollover dedicated fax lines were added. Computer engineers were able to route the faxes through the computers to digitize and identify the documents. For three weeks, we rented three additional computers to accommodate the people inputting the faxes into the database. Fax machine, computers, rentals, modems, technical help.

$15,000

I have added to my normal office overhead significant monthly expenses with the addition of the four dedicated fax lines. We have also upgraded our server to accommodate the emails and updates that are being sent to the group members. Paid computer assistance is required sometimes daily above what my normal law office expenses would be incurring.

The above costs do not include my office overhead of staff, rent, phones, etc. My hourly fee is $200 to $250 per hour depending on the nature of the work. I have devoted 97% of my work time to CMKX since April 1, 2005. Other work has been refused or has been referred out to other attorneys since I began this employment for Mr. Martin and the other shareholders. There have been many 16 hour days. There have been many weekends and late nights involved due to the research and client contact. An average week would be at least 50 hours per week. Thus total billable hours would be approximately 600 hours.

This breakdown has been prepared at John Martin’s request. I would ask you (my clients) not to post this update on any message board because frankly this should be between you (my clients) and me. I am uncomfortable posting financial matters between myself and my clients in a forum that will most likely be posted on various message boards and be subject to criticism and probably ridicule by some. John has always had a pretty good sense of what you as a group are needing, so here it is. I am told there are some members that are concerned these contributions are sending a windfall this direction. That simply is not the case.

Phase II

A couple of weeks ago I was asked to send out a new agreement so that I can continue the work we started in March. I never thought there would be such a thing as a Phase I or Phase II, but then nothing about CMKX surprises me at this point. I am agreeing to continue my efforts to work for John and all other interested shareholders. I have identified several areas that I will agree to undertake in what we call Phase II.

Audit Monitoring

I have an agreement in principal with Don Stoecklein that we will provide someone to talk with the new auditor so we can be informed of the progress of the audit. This is not in writing, but I will attempt to get some definite written parameters for this monitoring in the next few days.

FOIA

I have filed a FOIA request for certain DTCC records that we are entitled to receive. Our request has been denied. I have appealed that denial. I frankly expect the appeal will be denied. I plan to appeal that denial by filing suit in District Court. The law requires that we exhaust all administrative remedies before suit can be filed so I must continue my work though the administrative process before filing suit.

Naked Shorting

We have proven without question that certain parties have sold CMKX when such stock was not available. Our proof indicates to me there are at least a trillion shares outstanding and possibly as much as two or three trillion shares. We are making inroads with some influential politicians to investigate naked shorting and take action to see that this problem is corrected.

I want to continue using the proof we have developed to convince non believers of the extent of naked shorting, not just in this company but in other companies as well. I plan to continue to contact those companies that we know have significant short positions. As more people request their certs, stock positions held by the brokers and short sellers will become more apparent. There may come a time and a company that facts arise which will lend itself to litigation. As I set out in the Phase II agreement, I will contact each of you individually for your consent to proceed with litigation before I file suit. I will do so in your name only with your consent. In this area, I am continuing my efforts to get the company to obtain for us the DTCC sheets to which they are entitled.

Appeal of Administrative Ruling

We (shareholders) are not a party to this proceeding. We were granted a limited participation in the original proceeding, but we have no standing to appeal or even file briefs or the Petition to Review. There is a process for filing an Amicus Brief but I doubt that we would do that unless some progress is made on the auditing front. Don Stoecklein and Urban know of our concern about the appeal. I have asked to review the draft of the Petition to Review. I have offered to assist in preparation of the appeal. There is not a lot I can do at this point unless my assistance is accepted by the company. I believe there are some merits to an appeal of Judge Murray’s ruling, but there can be quite a lengthy delay brought on by the appeals process. I will stand ready to respond by brief, by letter or by phone conference to any issue that arises from the SEC, Judge Murray or the company.

Settlement Proposal

Most of you may have read the settlement proposal which has been sent (or is in the process of being sent) to the Commission. There is interest in our settlement proposal. I have no idea when we will have some decision on our proposal. I do plan to communicate with the SEC attorneys regarding the shareholders position on the appeal at any point that such communication may be beneficial to you.

New Investigations and Possible Litigations

I recently contacted Chris Bebel (www.chrisbebel.com) We discussed several areas in which I believe he would be of some great assistance. We are discussing a consulting agreement at this point. Chris has written several published articles in relevant areas. He is a former Assistant U.S. Attorney (DOJ) and a former SEC enforcement attorney. He is a highly sought out expert in several areas of securities law. Chris’ work and contacts in the NASD may be very helpful to us.

The information that many of you have provided as well as the documentation we have received from the SEC and the company has given this office a number of areas for further investigation. We have certain key individuals inside this company, that I believe illegally sold mountains of this stock in 2003 and 2004. I would love to contine my efforts with the SEC, the DTCC, and the NASD to determine full disclosure of these trades. I cannot go into further detail in this forum because I know these updates go directly to the bad guys. I plan on a new FOIA request asking for the SEC to reveal the specifics of the NASD investigations that have occurred in the past in CMKX.

We are knowledgeable of many bulk (billions) trades that occurred through certain companies that are clearly not retail customers. I would like to continue to investigate these trades and the companies involved in these trades. We have many bad guys that made fortunes on this stock during the last two years. I would love to hand deliver to law enforcement in a neat package the evidence necessary to indict those that are guilty of wrongdoing. Additional work is necessary in this regard.

There are tremendous tax consequences to many of these transactions. I am convinced there are those who want us to fail so they can escape certain tax liabilities. We should continue our work to see that these individuals do not have sufficient input to hamper our filing process.

Asset Evaluation

There are many of you who believe we are on a wild goose chase and that the company’s claims are worthless moose pasture. I do not know the value of the company’s assets. If the company is willing to share some information with me, and pay my way to Ecuador and Canada, I would love to make the trip. I would look forward to reporting my findings to you upon my return.

The ultimate outcome of everyone’s investment hinges not on naked shorting or SEC actions, but on the true evaluation of the company assets. We have some information about these assets, but we need more. The more I find out about the company, the more I become concerned that neither the company nor the SEC wanted you to know about the evaluation of the assets at the Administrative Hearing.

Information Updates

We have a new Phase II group that will be receiving all future email updates. We apologize to those of you that have complained about receiving two updates. This brings me to a concern that many of you shareholders have expressed. Contrary to popular belief, we do not post these updates to any of the boards. This update is not designed to be bulletin board material. It is intended to be a communication between a group member and this office. I know that the content of these updates goes directly to the bad guys, the SEC and to other third parties. I know because I receive emails from the bashers almost as soon as our updates are sent to you. Surely, you can understand that some information must be kept from the bad guys. I must refrain from revealing certain facts in these updates because many people repost these updates to people and places that are not supportive of your cause. Please refrain from posting these updates to any message boards. Feel free to discuss any aspects of our updates with fellow shareholders and on the boards, but lets play our cards a little closer to the vest.

It has been brought to our attention that some shareholder information has recently been obtained from the SEC as a result of the administrative hearing. I have received calls from several shareholders that are disturbed that some of their personal information will be posted on the internet as a result of the documents obtained from the SEC. A lawyer cannot advise a client in an area that might adversely affect another client, so I will refrain from giving advice in this area. I work extremely hard to avoid releasing personal information of my clients to the internet for any reason. We have shareholder lists and NOBO lists and I have repeatedly declined to post those documents. You may recall that I requested confidentiality from the Judge before even sending our CD proof of naked shorting for this very reason.

Closing

I have never enjoyed working on any case as much as I have enjoyed working for this group. These next few weeks will be critical. The challenges will continue and I believe the real wars are just now beginning. I am convinced our efforts are not in vain.

Onward,

Bill

[sandi66]

Subject: Update 7/28/05
From: [e-mail]
Date: Thu, 28 Jul 2005 16:38:58 -0700

FRIZZELL LAW FIRM
305 S. Broadway, Suite 302
Tyler, Texas 75702
[phone]
E-Mail [e-mail]

Dear Owners Group Members,
I am concerned with my inability to get confirmation for you that our audit is progressing and our appeal will be timely filed. I have forwarded a letter to the company today and you can read it online at www.cmkxownersgroup.com click on the document section.

Onward!
Bill

[sandi66]

Subject: July 29 Update
From: [e-mail]
Date: Fri, 29 Jul 2005 14:25:32 -0700

FRIZZELL LAW FIRM
305 S. Broadway, Suite 302
Tyler, Texas 75702
[phone]
E-Mail [e-mail]

Dear Group Members,
I concluded this morning a 45 minute conference call with Urban and a representative of Don Stoecklein's office. Don remains unavailable. Urban has been out of the country and away from phone contact most of the past week. The discussion was very amiable and informative. Some tough questions were asked. Explanations were made regarding the lack of communication this week.

The 8k issued this morning explains the ongoing problems with the auditor. I appreciate those that have offered their services for audit monitoring duty but there will be no immediate need for such help. I am retaining your info for future reference. If any of you with auditiing experience would like to comment on the letters in the 8k, I would be glad to hear your thoughts from an accounting perspective. The company continues to spend valuable time and money attempting to engage an auditor that will actually produce auditable financials. It seems to me that once an auditor receives a $25,000 due diligence fee before accepting emploment, and he then signs an engagement letter it would have to be some pretty unusual circumstances to assert that you cannot perform the audit. I share your pain, folks.

Mr. Stoecklein's office is filing a Petition for Review in the decision handed down by Judge Murray. I am reviewing a rough draft of the petition. The appeal will be filed before Tuesday per Mr. Stoecklein's office. I will post a copy when the original is filed.

I plan on withdrawing my request for an inspection at this time. One of the problems with the audit process is the company's ability to provide sufficient documentation of all matters requiring disclosure. Much discussion took place this morning regarding the problem with the audit. I believe any significant inspection to which we may be entitled to perform at this time, may potentially interfere with any ongoing efforts of the company to get financials filed. I do not wish to interefere with any operations at this point knowing that the revocation is being appealed.

Urban stated emphatically that CMKX shareholders own the American Shaft. I asked Urban about the wording on the Nevada Minerals website and he was not hesitant in saying that CMKX owns the shaft and Nevada Minerals produces out of it. My conversation with Urban leads me to believe there has been no disposition or sale of any assets or claims in recent months to any third parties, nor is there any plan for the sale of any assets at this time or in the near future.

I understand someone has seen a tv ad promoting the Dateline story this Sunday night. Now that should be interesting.

Onward,
Bill

[sandi66]

Subject: Extra Update 7/29/05
From: [e-mail]
Date: Fri, 29 Jul 2005 16:28:20 -0700

FRIZZELL LAW FIRM
305 S. Broadway, Suite 302
Tyler, Texas 75702
[phone]
E-Mail [e-mail]

Dear Owners Group Members,
You can now read the CMKX Petition for Review on or site at www.cmkxownersgroup.com

Have a good weekend!

For Bill,
John

[sandi66]

Subject: August 1, 2005 Update
From: [e-mail]
Date: Mon, 1 Aug 2005 15:44:22 -0700

FRIZZELL LAW FIRM
305 S. Broadway, Suite 302
Tyler, Texas 75702
[phone]
E-Mail [e-mail]

Dear Members,

We have posted a letter to the CMKX Owners Group website which was just received from Don Stoecklein. www.cmkxownersgroup.com CMKM Diamonds, Inc. has formally withdrawn the offer of settlement which was initially made to the SEC. The letter is self explanatory. Settlement discussions will continue but I do not expect substantive discussions until a new auditor can be retained. I have been advised an 8k will be filed by the company tonight or tomorrow. Don and I have been discussing the auditor situation and Don remains confident the company will continue its efforts to obtain an auditor to complete the task.

Onward,
Bill

[sandi66]

Subject: August 4, 2005 Update
From: [e-mail]
Date: Thu, 4 Aug 2005 15:54:41 -0700

FRIZZELL LAW FIRM
305 S. Broadway, Suite 302
Tyler, Texas 75702
[phone]
E-Mail [e-mail]

Dear Group Members,

We have confirmed with Don Stoecklein's office that a new auditor has not been engaged. When a new auditor is engaged, the company will follow the SEC rules and file an appropriate 8k. Rumors have been flying about CIM being registered in European markets. Mr. Stoecklein believes this must be another company with the same trading symbol. To his knowledge our CIM is not involved in the European markets. We have received many questions about Mr. Maheu's involvement. Bob is involved. Bob is providing input. Bob was out of town for a few days recently but is still working for CMKM Diamonds, Inc. I have visited with Mr. Stoecklein about the signature page on the Petition For Review. He has agreed to review any authority to the contrary, but we both agree this would not be a valid basis for denying the appeal or for denying the filing of the petition. It is not uncommon for attorneys who are out of town (Mr. Stoecklein was out of town on the date the Petition was filed) to have an office staffer to sign off on a paper that needed to be filed. This would be a highly unusual ground to urge for the dismissal of an appeal. At the very minimum the SEC would have to point out such defect and the company would more than likely be entitled to amend the signature. The Petition For Review is posted on our website www.cmkxownersgroup.com for those of you that are still wondering if we are going to appeal. The appeal was filed last Friday.

Onward,
Bill

[sandi66]

Subject: August 8, 2005 Update
From: [e-mail]
Date: Mon, 8 Aug 2005 14:24:17 -0700

FRIZZELL LAW FIRM
305 S. Broadway, Suite 302
Tyler, Texas 75702
[phone]
E-Mail [e-mail]

Dear Group Members,

The SEC (Commission) earlier on this day granted the Petition For Review and accordingly ordered that briefs be filed by both parties. I have posted this document on our web site at www.cmkxownersgroup.com . This document is entitled "Order Granting Review". The brief from the company will be due on September 6, 2005 and the brief from the SEC is due on October 6, 2005. If the company wishes to reply to the SEC's response, they will have until October 20, 2005 for such reply brief. This is not a ruling on any substantive issues.

This is the Commission's agreement to review the appeal being made by the company. I am not surprised that the Commission would agree to review Judge Murray's ruling because of the large number of shareholders affected by this ruling. This does not mean the Commission has made any decisions about the company's appeal. This order merely tells the parties to file their briefs along with their arguments.

I have just received a copy of the SEC Enforcement Division's Motion For Summary Affirmance. You may view this document at our web site as well. The document is entitled "SEC Motion For Summary Affirmance". This is the SEC's attempt to have the Commission throw the appeal out without any further delay. I expect the company will make some kind of written response to this Motion. I will comment further after speaking with the company's attorney. I hope to be able to give you more information in the morning by way of another update.

Onward,
Bill

[sandi66]

Subject: August 12, 2005 Update
From: [e-mail]
Date: Fri, 12 Aug 2005 16:44:13 -0700

FRIZZELL LAW FIRM
305 S. Broadway, Suite 302
Tyler, Texas 75702
[phone]
E-Mail [e-mail]

Dear Group Members,

Greetings to all. I have just received a copy of the company's reply to the SEC's Motion For Summary Affirmance. You can view the document at your convenience. It is posted on the group website at www.cmkxownersgroup.com . The Commission now has the option of granting the SEC's motion which would effectively end all appeals at the SEC level. If the Court denies the SEC's motion, briefs will be filed per the schedule set out in the Order Granting the Petition For Review. It would seem a bit unusual for the Commission to grant a Summary Affirmance after it has already agreed to accept briefs and review the decision of Judge Murray. I have learned that anything is possible in CMKX matters.

There is no news regarding any new auditor. It is my understanding the Company is attempting to assemble all needed records so there will be no future failed audit attempts as we have experienced with Levine and Beckstead.

Have a good weekend.

Onward,
Bill

[sandi66]

Subject: August 12, 2005 Update
From: [e-mail]
Date: Fri, 12 Aug 2005 16:44:13 -0700

FRIZZELL LAW FIRM
305 S. Broadway, Suite 302
Tyler, Texas 75702
[phone]
E-Mail [e-mail]

Dear Group Members,

Greetings to all. I have just received a copy of the company's reply to the SEC's Motion For Summary Affirmance. You can view the document at your convenience. It is posted on the group website at www.cmkxownersgroup.com . The Commission now has the option of granting the SEC's motion which would effectively end all appeals at the SEC level. If the Court denies the SEC's motion, briefs will be filed per the schedule set out in the Order Granting the Petition For Review. It would seem a bit unusual for the Commission to grant a Summary Affirmance after it has already agreed to accept briefs and review the decision of Judge Murray. I have learned that anything is possible in CMKX matters.

There is no news regarding any new auditor. It is my understanding the Company is attempting to assemble all needed records so there will be no future failed audit attempts as we have experienced with Levine and Beckstead.

Have a good weekend.

Onward,
Bill

[sandi66]

Subject: August 17, update
From: [e-mail]
Date: Wed, 17 Aug 2005 18:16:24 -0700

FRIZZELL LAW FIRM
305 S. Broadway, Suite 302
Tyler, Texas 75702
[phone]
E-Mail [e-mail]

Greetings Members,

I would like to take the time in this update to discuss several items with you.

Appeal Process: Many of you have read the company's response to the SEC's Motion For Affirmance. I have received nothing from the Commission which suggests the Motion For Affirmance will be granted. As it stands right now, a brief from the company will be filed on or before September 6. The SEC will most likely file their response by October 6. The company will have until October 20 to reply to the SEC's brief. Mr. Stoecklein and I spoke yesterday about the brief and we have agreed to collaborate in the preparation. He has already begun the briefing. I will probably be asked to offer input after the first draft is completed. Mr. Stoecklein is a competent attorney and I expect the brief to adequately cover things from the shareholders' perspective. The wording in the order makes it apparent the Commission does not desire a brief from me or any other party. In order to file a brief on behalf of the shareholders, I would need to obtain permission from the Court before doing so. I do not plan to do that.
Litigation: Thanks to some incredible work from some of your dedicated shareholders, I have been able to keep abreast of many lawsuits that have been filed in the last few months against parties that are involved with CMKX and your investment. It appears to me that there are individuals and companies who have been the victims of some unscrupulous stock deals and they have hired lawyers to file suits to obtain redress. I am becoming convinced that litigation may be necessary on your behalf against some third parties to allow me to obtain all the facts necessary to help this group. As you may know by now a certain individual opened numerous trading accounts in 2003 and 2004 at a well known Nevada broker/dealer to facilitate the sale of hundreds of billions of shares of CMKX stock. Short selling no doubt occurred once it became known in the market that nearly 800 billion shares of CMKX had hit the streets. A lawsuit against certain parties would greatly assist us in obtaining the facts necessary to identify all parties involved in any trading improprieties and will allow us to accurately identify the short sellers. If I decide to bring any lawsuit, I will obtain permission from the shareholder that will be the named plaintiff or plaintiffs in the lawsuit. Any suit will not be brought on behalf of the CMKX Owners Group. There will be no individual shareholders named other than the individuals I select to bring any claims. If I brought a lawsuit on behalf of the CMKX Owners Group, I might be required to spend the next couple of years attending the depositions of 6,000 or 7,000 shareholders or responding in discovery to requests for documents from all of the 6,000 or 7,000 shareholders. This would of course be a waste of the shareholders time and mine. There is concern that a lawsuit by a small number of people would allow us to obtain some huge financial settlement for only those named in the lawsuit. Damages will clearly be sought against those that may be sued. The damages sought will relate to the losses incurred by the named plaintiffs. If a lawsuit went extremely well and certain defendants wished to offer any serious sums of money for settlement, it would be simple to ask the Court's permission to assist us in some way to apportion any recovery amongst the shareholders. I am not a class action lawyer and do not plan on bringing a class action lawsuit. If a class action of some type is in order, I will cooperate with such lawyers for the benefit of all shareholders, but that is not my desire nor my purpose in this potential litigation. Any lawsuit, deposition, subpoena or discovery that I might bring will benefit all of the shareholders if it benefits any one shareholder. I have been litigating cases for 27 years and I know the task I am undertaking if I choose to bring litigation. I will only do it if I am convinced I have no other avenue of obtaining the information I am seeking and there is no other way to get redress for the shareholders. This will not be a suit against the company nor Urban Casavant at this point in the proceedings. John tells me there are those that suggest a lawsuit would yield tons of money for only those that I choose to name as a plaintiff so what good would it do for the shareholders. Remarks like that are very unsettling to me. I have become very thick skinned to some of the remarks I receive from a select few. I do not respond to those that choose to make personal assaults on my integrity or my courses of action. I know that my efforts are helping the shareholders and I plan to continue to do so.

Private Party in Tyler--Last week we were honored here in Tyler to have Hugo Cancio and a production crew come to my office for filming segments of Hugo's documentary on the saga of CMKX. Hugo felt it important that he document all sides of the CMKX story including the plight of the shareholders. He has been to Ecuador, Canada and Las Vegas with Urban and other insiders in the company. He is producing a story that needs to be told. Knowing that Hugo would be in town, I suggested that John invite some of the shareholders from this area to drop by while Hugo was here. Some were interviewed for the documentary. Some of your well respected shareholders came here from Northeast Texas and East Texas to meet Hugo and have a little fellowship. John invited us to his home after a long day of videoing around the office. The fine lady shareholder that allowed me to stay in her home when I went to Washington last month was able to arrange her travels to spend a night in East Texas. I took the opportunity to share a select few documents that we had obtained as a result of months of due diligence by this office and many dedicated shareholders. You have some shareholders out there that spend endless hours researching and investigating various aspects of this case. Their hard work is paying off. I would not dare name them because it would embarrass them and they are not doing this work in order to draw attention to themselves. Please know that I (and all the other shareholders) will forever be indebted to you. Kudos to all of you that are helping to shed light on the problems facing this company. Much talk has occurred since this meeting about my choice to show only certain information and only to certain individuals. I scanned in a handful of documents and did a brief video presentation of some of the documents. I did not hand out any copies of the information. I did not pass out pencil and paper. It was a short show and tell. Some of the information was disturbing because it was the first time some people had seen an explanation of how these shares hit the market in such a short period of time. I have posted on the owners group site www.cmkxownersgroup.com a copy of a ledger sheet with some handwritten notes that was prepared by someone for Neil Levine as he was working on the audit before the administrative law hearing. We have entitled this document the "Share Distribution Breakdown". This was obtained by me as an item of discovery that went to all parties during the preliminary phases of the administrative proceeding. This is not the "smoking gun" that solves all riddles of the CMKX story but it is very helpful in explaining some things that bothered me (and I assume most shareholders) for a long time. How in the world can a company get nearly 800 billion shares into the market place in such a short period of time? Sometimes documents like this create more questions than answers. Believe me, we are working on answers to the questions that come from documents such as this. The facts surrounding the stock distributions will all come out when the company files it financials. Combine this document with the shareholder information which Pedro has provided you and you can start to piece this thing together. I have obtained mountains of information and more comes to my office on a daily basis. My practice is dedicated to this case alone. Those of you that suggest I am hiding information for some sinister self serving purpose should give more thought to that idea. I am simply bound by laws regarding confidentiality and common sense in the release of most of this information. Many shareholders have been to this office and you are all invited to see what goes on around here on a daily basis. You are all welcome. We are all in this together.

Communication--Several people have asked about the level of communication between my office and the company. We are not having problems getting each other on the phone. I talked with Don Stoecklein yesterday. He called me while Urban, Ed Dhonau and Anthony Demint were in his office. We discussed the brief and suggestions were made to leave from Vegas to go to Ecuador after the Labor Day weekend. I expressed my desire to meet and discuss the plan for the shareholders and the present state of the claims and various businesses that make up CMKX. It is the company's position that it would violate SEC rules to selectively disclose information about assets and significant activities to certain shareholders (our owners group) without disclosing information to all shareholders. We agreed that such disclosure could occur if I would agree to make my updates following or simultaneously with an 8k. I am hopeful this will facilitate better and regular information from the company. Sorry, but I have no dates to give you on when this might start occurring. I have stated that we have no problem with such arrangement.

Rumor Busting--I hate to be one to burst some hopeful bubbles, because I know the anxiety many of you experience when a rumor begins to fly. I have not been involved in any discussions about settlements with any parties. Neither the company nor any third party has seen fit to call me with any discussions of settlements or even facts that suggest a settlement is in the works. If there is talk betweent he company and any third parties, I am not privy to such talks and have not been told of any. I cannot tell you for a fact that there are no discussions of settlement. I can simply tell you that I have not been involved in any discussions with anyone about settlements. John Martin has likewise not been contacted about settlements being offered by anyone. It will be one cool update when I can relate the substance of any such discussions with you.

Evaluation--I can tell you that I am comfortable in saying the claims represented by the company are being maintained. I make this statement based on reports from third parties that should be "in the know". John and I decided several months ago to make it a part of our investigation to determine as best as we could the existence and value of the claims which we have been told belong to the company. We have paid people on the ground in Canada to give us information about the claims. We do not have a figure for the $value of the claims in Canada, but I am convinced there is substantial value for many reasons. Our investigation reveals there has been a drilling program that continues as we speak. We hope to get more information for you as to the results of the drilling. The last PR about the drilling results probably did more harm than good. I believe we can get better information to you. I have told Mr. Stoecklein that I have some acquaintances of mine in the Oil business that are researching the area and there may be interest the oil concessions on our claims. It will take a another couple of weeks but I plan to continue my efforts in this regard.

Phase II--Some questions have been asked about the status of my work as Phase II or Phase I. The original (Phase I if you will) employment agreement clearly states that my agreement to represent the owners group concluded with a decision by the Administrative Law Judge. This decision was handed down on July 12. John suggested a Phase II because the work we had begun in addition to the administrative hearing representation was far short of being complete. We began receiving contributions and Phase II agreements before the Judge's decision came down. Many of you have not only contributed to Phase II, some have added contributions above the requested $25. Your funds make it possible to continue the work we have begun. I am thankful for your contributions of course. But I am equally thankful to you for the words of support and encouragement that sometimes comes along with your signups. It gets discouraging when hard work gets mocked and ridiculed by certain people. There are a select few out there that seem to delight in being critical, sarcastic and demeaning to our efforts. If I am forced (and it appears I will be) to begin litigation, Phase II will be expensive and could take quite a long time to resolve. If I did not believe it would be helpful to the overall cause of this representation, I would not consider it. I am starting to believe it will be mandatory. John and I have agreed not to do separate updates to Phase I and Phase II members. I hope we do not have to revisit this decision. I have been honored to represent the shareholders as a group. I feel honored to work for the individuals I have met personally as a result of this representation . I wish there were a way to meet all of the group members. This group if it stays together will be a force to be reckoned with. The bad guys would love to see a fractured broken shareholders' group. After all, isn't that how most shareholders do when their investment goes sour? They just run away, bad mouth the promoters and write off their investment losses. A strong shareholders' group can make a difference. We can have disagreements and work them out like mature intelligent people, but we must stick together.

Naked Shorts--In my opinion we have proved the largest naked short in the history of the market. Will these illegal acts benefit the shareholders? There are many factors that must come into play, but I am very encouraged. Management has not "run off". The real assets of the company appear to be in place. It will only take a few deals to get done before these huge short position will be at the mercy of the marketplace. I look forward to that scramble.

Caveat--I do not advise any one to buy or sell stock based on the information contained in this update. You are advised that an administrative judge has ordered a deregistration of the securities of this company because the company has failed to file financial reports required by the SEC. There are serious complications to trading your stock if the de-registration order becomes final. Seek competent advice from a competent investment advisor before deciding to purchase CMKX stock.

Onward,
Bill

[sandi66]

Subject: August 18, 2005 update
From: [e-mail]
Date: Thu, 18 Aug 2005 15:35:43 -0700

FRIZZELL LAW FIRM
305 S. Broadway, Suite 302
Tyler, Texas 75702
[phone]
E-Mail [e-mail]

Dear Group, I have posted on the cmkx owners' group web site a reply from the SEC to the company's response to the Motion For Summary Affirmance. www.cmkxownersgroup.com The document is entitled "SEC Reply Memo". This is the latest effort of the SEC to urge the Commission to deny the company's efforts to appeal. The SEC is pointing out to the Commission that the company response is inadequate and that legal grounds exist to deny the appeal and summarily affirm Judge Murray's decision. The Commission may rule on this motion or they may just let the parties file their briefs. We will see.

I have posted on our website a list of accounts which I have learned were opened at a certain brokerage firm by a single person. See www.cmkxownersgroup.com . We have named the document "List of Trading Accounts". This document was obtained in discovery from the SEC just prior to the administrative proceeding. We believe a large number of shares of CMKX stock were traded through these accounts. I would appreciate a note from any of you that are familiar with any of these companies or trusts. We have information on most of the companies but some of you may have additional information. Please write John at [e-mail] with your information. Put the company name on the subject line to help us in sorting the information. I am particularly interested in knowing the names of any principal owners or key people in these companies. I mentioned these accounts in my update last night. This document does not necessarily imply wrongdoing on the part of these companies. We feel compelled to investigate the companies regardless. The shareholder list which has already been posted on the boards will give you cert information on many of these entities.

Onward,
Bill

[sandi66]

Subject: August 19, 2005 update
From: [e-mail]
Date: Fri, 19 Aug 2005 12:09:12 -0700

FRIZZELL LAW FIRM
305 S. Broadway, Suite 302
Tyler, Texas 75702
[phone]
E-Mail [e-mail]

Dear Group Members,

I have just posted some photos of some of the addresses that are associated with various businesses that transacted certs in CMKX stock in 03 and 04. There is nothing illegal about using a mail drop as a business address. Draw your own conclusions about this activity. The photos can be seen on the CMKX owners group website. See www.cmkxownersgroup.com . The photos are entitled
"Address Pictures"

Have a good weekend,

Onward,
Bill

[sandi66]

Subject: August 23, 2005 Update
From: [e-mail]
Date: Tue, 23 Aug 2005 09:41:25 -0700

FRIZZELL LAW FIRM
305 S. Broadway, Suite 302
Tyler, Texas 75702
[phone]
E-Mail [e-mail]

Greetings group members,

I have posted on our cmkx owners group website the contract between the company and "025". This document is entitled "Claims Contract". There has been much discussion about the current status of the claims in Canada. I hope this will be helpful to you. The agreement may answer some of the questions you have asked about the claims. This document was the original agreement between the parties.

Onward,
Bill

[sandi66]

Subject: Update August 30, 2005
From: [e-mail]
Date: Tue, 30 Aug 2005 16:09:10 -0700

FRIZZELL LAW FIRM
305 S. Broadway, Suite 302
Tyler, Texas 75702
[phone]
E-Mail [e-mail]

Dear Group Members,

I planned on an update last Friday, but I chose to wait until today in light of the rumors regarding the Monday windfall everyone would receive. I had no knowledge from the company of anything occurring by way of any settlement discussions or merger actions, but I thought it best to allow Monday to pass as an accommodation to those that believed the unfounded rumors.

I have heard that Andy Hill has made some comments that the company would release some evaluations in five or six weeks. My last discussions with Mr. Stoecklein indicated the company was agreeable to releasing an 8k with some evaluation information but we did not agree on any specific timetable. I have been told that Urban is out of the country. I have no confirmation of this.

As many of you know by now in 2004, the company issued over 600 billion shares of stock. If we follow the last tick daily price per share, the stock began at .0001, went to .0008 and back down to .0001 by the end of the year. If the average stock price was .0003, 180 million dollars worth of stock went through the hands of various third parties. I believe the actual stock sales were twice that amount.

Whatever the reason was for such dilution, it was wrong and illegal. Your stock price today is burdened with such a huge amount of stock, you are entitled to have some answers to your concerns.

Under recent state and federal legislation, the legal system does not give you as a shareholder an easy route through the courts to go after those who have profited illegally from their deeds. Your rights are "derivative" of the company's rights to go after the bad guys. The legal term describing your rights is a "shareholder derivative rights" cause of action. As a shareholder, you must first make a demand on the company to assert any claims the company has against the bad guys. If the company chooses not to assert their rights against the bad guys, for whatever reason, then you can proceed. I will be issuing on your behalf by Thursday afternoon or Friday, a demand letter to Mr. Stoecklein demanding that action be taken against certain individuals that have been parties to the dilution of this company. I will name specifically certain individuals and request that action of specific types be taken against them. There will be a stated time for the company to take action. When that time passes, and no action occurs, you will have the right as shareholders to assert your rights in your own lawsuit. I will be out of town tomorrow and will return on Thursday about mid day. Thus my comment on when this will occur.

In a separate letter, I will be asking the company to convene an annual shareholders meeting where you can come and ask questions of your CEO or any of its officers and directors. This company has never had one (unless you call the shareholders party last year-an annual shareholders meeting), and I think you should be allowed such a meeting. I hope to speak with Mr. Stoecklein before then to get some parameters on such a meeting.

Finally, I have a rough draft prepared in my lawsuit against the SEC for their failure to provide to me the information I requested several months ago. Our request was denied and we filed an appeal of such request. To date I have had no response to our appeal and we have thus exhausted our administrative remedies. This is a prerequisite before a lawsuit can be filed. This lawsuit will be filed on Friday.

I will post this lawsuit and the letters mentioned above once I have completed them.

Onward,
Bill Frizzell

[sandi66]

Subject: September 2, 2005 Update
From: [e-mail]
Date: Fri, 2 Sep 2005 15:09:51 -0700

FRIZZELL LAW FIRM
305 S. Broadway, Suite 302
Tyler, Texas 75702
[phone]
E-Mail [e-mail]

Greetings fellow shareholders,

I have posted two items on the owners' group website on this date. Go to www.cmkxownersgroup.com . Suit was filed today in Federal Court here in the Eastern District against the SEC for failing to provide us with information we sought under our FOIA request a couple of months ago. The document is named "SEC lawsuit". I have received no response to our appeal of the SEC's rejection of our request. The next step in the process is seeking the assistance of the court system. The SEC will be served with the lawsuit next week. You will be advised of their response as soon as I receive it. The suit has been brought by John Martin as the named plaintiff, both individually and as a member of the CMKX Owners Group. I have no plans of naming individual members of the group. If I am requested to specify by names all members of the Owners Group, I will drop the group as named plaintiffs. Any person can request information under FOIA.

I have also posted a brief letter that was sent to Don Stoecklein a short while ago suggesting that a shareholders meeting be convened. I have been told the company wants to release information about evaluation but is somewhat constrained as to the manner in which this information can be sent to the shareholders. This letter presents a formal request for the meeting. This was suggested by several shareholders. I will let you know the company's response.

I promised you three things today, but I apologize the third matter may take another day or so. The Eastern District of Texas has gone to an electronic filing system but still has some problems being worked out before you can do everything online. Due to certain problems with getting the SEC suit filed and several other "emergencies", I was unable to finish the letter I promised regarding the shareholder derivative matters. This letter to the company must be specific not only as to people but as to the legal action we request that the company pursue. I may have the letter finished over the weekend but I will have it posted no later than Tuesday.

Keep Katrina's victims in your prayers. Have a safe and enjoyable Labor Day weekend.

Onward,

Bill

[sandi66]

Subject: September 6, 2005 Update
From: [e-mail]
Date: Tue, 6 Sep 2005 16:39:39 -0700

FRIZZELL LAW FIRM
305 S. Broadway, Suite 302
Tyler, Texas 75702
[phone]
E-Mail [e-mail]

Greetings Members,

I have received a copy of the Brief In Support Of Petition For Review which was filed by the company on this date. We have posted this brief on the Owners Group website. The document is entitled "Company Appellate Brief". See www.cmkxownersgroup.com

I have on this date sent a letter to Mr. Stoecklein asking that the company consider taking action against certain third parties. State and federal law requires that shareholders request legal action by the company before any rights to assert those claims can be undertaken by shareholders. The letter has been posted as "Shareholder Derivative Letter". See www.cmkxownersgroup.com

More later this week.

Onward,
Bill

[sandi66]

Subject: Update September 16, 2005
From: [e-mail]
Date: Fri, 16 Sep 2005 16:01:44 -0700

FRIZZELL LAW FIRM
305 S. Broadway, Suite 302
Tyler, Texas 75702
[phone]
E-Mail [e-mail]

Dear Group Members,

I am posting the marriage certificates obtained from the marriage records of Clark County on John Michael Edwards. You may remember seeing a Debra Edwards Trust listed on the Nev West list of accounts. There is record of a divorce between John Edwards and Debra Edwards prior to the marriage to Diana Lee. See "Edwards Marriage Certificates" on the owners group website www.cmkxownersgroup.com ....

I received information of a lawsuit between John Edwards and Gary Walters from one of our shareholders. The following petition was found in the public records in Las Vegas. The case was dismissed shortly after it was filed. This means there was apparently some settlement reached between the parties on the subject matter. See "Walters v. Edwards Lawsuit" on the owners group website www.cmkxownersgroup.com .

I have received many comments and questions about the Neil Levine arrangement. I am posting the agreement which was stipulated to by the parties at the administrative hearing. When the parties (SEC and CMKX) stipulate to an agreement, it is considered evidence and authenticated for purposes of the records. You might be interested in some of the details of the agreement. See "Levine Contract" on the owners group website www.cmkxownersgroup.com .

Have a good weekend.

Onward,
Bill

[sandi66]

Subject: September 26, 2005 update
From: [e-mail]
Date: Mon, 26 Sep 2005 12:30:41 -0700

FRIZZELL LAW FIRM
305 S. Broadway, Suite 302
Tyler, Texas 75702
[phone]
E-Mail [e-mail]

Dear Group Members,

Thank you all for your concern over Rita. When Rita made landfall, it took a course about 60 miles to our East. We had an interesting Saturday with some strong winds and a bunch of rain that continued all day long, but relatively speaking we escaped any serious consequences. I wish our friends and relatives on the coast had fared as well. Keep them in your prayers.

There seems to be a lot of speculation about the company's response to our shareholders derivative rights letter. We have received no official response from the company and I will relay any response to you as soon as we receive it.

We are continuing our investigations some of which were outlined in the shareholders derivative letter. I look forward to having more information for you in our next update. I regret having to report that there is nothing to report. It is probably better to hear there is nothing to report than an extended period of silence.

Onward,
Bill

[sandi66]

Subject: Update 9/30/2005
From: [e-mail]
Date: Fri, 30 Sep 2005 17:07:34 -0700

FRIZZELL LAW FIRM
305 S. Broadway, Suite 302
Tyler, Texas 75702
[phone]
E-Mail [e-mail]

Greetings Group Members,

I was briefed today on most of the rumors floating around about CMKX. I wish I could confirm any of them as being truthful because I am sensitive to the emotional roller coaster many of the shareholders have been riding for a couple of years or more. If there is a deal that has been struck for the claims, I have not been involved in the negotiation of such deal. I would not expect to be involved in any such deals as I represent shareholders and there are rules against selective dissemination of information to shareholders. I cannot confirm that there is a deal which has been struck but I remain cautiously optimistic that there is a plan of sorts that will benefit the shareholders.

Don Stoecklein has been out of town and we have not had any extensive conversations of late. I have been asked to attend a board meeting of the CMKX Board of Directors. We have not confirmed a date, time or place. It is my understanding that such meeting will occur in the next month or two. I have not been given any agenda of such meeting and if I do receive a copy of an agenda I will post the same for you.

There has been no official response from the company to our shareholder's derivative rights letter. I will post a copy if and when such response is made.

There has been much activity on the naked short battlefield. I believe the regulatory bodies are moving in the right direction. The war on naked shorts is no longer being fought by a bunch of shareholder that "made bad investments in bad companies." We have people like Dave Hatch to thank for taking this task on. We have legislators and regulatory officials starting to realize they should take action and are in fact doing so. We have the NASD taking action. The trading exchanges are becoming involved in correcting the problems caused by naked shorting in the market place. I am overjoyed that the ball is rolling.

I have received several emails of late inquiring about our naked short investigation. We have continued to tally shares by people that have sent their statements to us but the numbers are not changing significantly. We proved a huge naked short position in this company a long time ago. Our documentation substantiates 482 billion shares (approximately) owned by 11557 shareholders. This does not include cert holders. There remains approximately 48000 shareholders that have not sent us their holdings. By my estimates there are at least a trillion and a half shares that have been sold in CMKX stock. When all shares (including foreign and obo accounts) are added to the mix, the total could exceed two trillion shares.
Have a good weekend.

Onward,
Bill

[sandi66]

Subject: Update 10/03/05
From: [e-mail]
Date: Mon, 3 Oct 2005 17:45:14 -0700

FRIZZELL LAW FIRM
305 S. Broadway, Suite 302
Tyler, Texas 75702
[phone]
E-Mail [e-mail]

Dear Group Members,

It has been brought to my attention that some confusion may exist over my involvement in The Owners Group, Inc.(OGI). I would like to clear up any misunderstanding about my involvement with this new company.

John Martin approached me several months ago about representing him and some local CMKX shareholders in an investigation into the stock manipulation of CMKX stock. It became apparent there were a large number of shareholders that believed it would be helpful to have a lawyer investigate the activities surrounding the stock. I suggested we try to intervene in the SEC proceeding as well. The Court allowed us to participate in the proceedings. We began our investigation into the naked shorting of the company and documented our claims of naked shorting. This brought about what we now call Phase 1. Judge Murray has now ruled that the company's registration should be revoked. This concluded my work under Phase 1.

We learned quite a lot about the abuses occurring in the marketplace and in particular problems that occurred in CMKX. Additional work was desired by many of the shareholders. I offered to file suit against the SEC for failing to disclose the items we requested in our FOIA request. I agreed to continue our investigation into the acts of various third parties and I agreed to continue documenting our naked short position. Continuation of these matters was being done on the basis of a new agreement that has become known as Phase II.

Three or four months ago John Martin grew increasingly upset as he began to see how full of fraud the stock market had become. We kept seeing the same names and companies pop up in all of our investigations. Invariably wheninvestigating a stock other than CMKX we would see so many of the same individuals and companies involved. John came up with an idea of how to help combat the bad guys, and try to make a difference for all investors in the small cap market. The idea was to form a company whose sole purpose was to find other companies trying to run their business correctly, and assist them in their efforts.

The OGI would seek out other companies who were free of intentional manipulation, free of massive dilution and management that did not have histories of criminal problems or problems with the SEC. The company would have to agree to undergo a very extensive due diligence investigation. This investigation would be directed more at the individuals running the companies and their business practices than the bottom line dollars they report to their shareholders. If the prospective company met the appropriate criteria, the OGI would then offer to perform investor relations type work and provide other services to them. The OGI would agree to work for restricted stock so the concerns about stock promoters taking stock and selling into some tout or bogus stock promotion would never arise. The ultimate goal of the OGI was to help give shareholders more information about the company and in particular company management before the shareholders made their investment. At the same time, the prospective companies would also benefit after subjecting themselves to diligent scrutiny.

John also came up with the idea of finding private companies who are scared to go public for fear of being manipulated, hold their hand through the process, and teach them how to combat these forces ahead of time. In my role as the attorney for many CMKX shareholders, I was contacted by several CEO's of the companies you hear about and read about. There is no question in my mind that there are hundreds if not thousands of viable companies that are being affected by the bad guys. John also came up with the idea of putting together a consortium of honest Attorneys, CPA's and Auditors who are willing to work for less because of greater volume and make it easier on the pockets of the companies to remain reporting.

John and I are simply fed up with what we see in the markets and the fear that people have to endure when investing in small cap companies. With these ideas in mind, The Owners Group, Inc. was formed.

I have been asked to serve as General Counsel and to serve on the Board of Directors. I see this as quite an opportunity to help other companies that are fearful of the markets and may very well fall prey to the bad guys in the market without help. I am honored to work for this new company.

I understand there are concerns that work on CMKX might be slighted. Simply not true. In fact, I am able to spend more time on CMKX because I will be paid a regular salary while I work with The Owners Group, Inc. A majority of the Phase I participants did not join in Phase II and I have continued to work in spite of a shortage of funds. Anyone that looked at the breakdown I provided on Phase I proceeds several months ago knows that this work has not provided any windfall of legal fees. CMKX shareholders remain my number one client and I look forward to continuing my efforts. I have filed suit against the SEC for their failure to provide records you are entitled to under FOIA. My work will continue on that lawsuit.

I hope this explanation helps to distinguish the OGI from the CMKX Owners Group. My work will continue as always to promote the interests of the CMKX shareholders. If you are interested in the activities of the OGI feel free to check out the web site. (www.theownersgroupinc.com ) The OGI profiled its first company last week. The company is American Security Resources Corporation.

( www.theownersgroupinc.com/clients.php ) The OGI will provide updates on a regular basis on companies that have passed the scrutiny of the OGI investigators. Only those requesting to opt in will receive future updates. You can view the web site and choose to receive additional updates if you desire. Having said that, there is no obligation nor expectation for any one of you to take any interest in the OGI. It is simply a separate company that I will be working with while I continue our work here.

Onward,

Bill

[sandi66]

Subject: Update 10/06/05
From: [e-mail]
Date: Thu, 6 Oct 2005 14:48:01 -0700

FRIZZELL LAW FIRM
305 S. Broadway, Suite 302
Tyler, Texas 75702
[phone]
E-Mail [e-mail]

Good afternoon!

The SEC Final Brief Response is now available on our web site www.cmkxownersgroup.com Just click on the documents link.
Bill is working on an update to come out hopefully by tomorrow evening. I have asked him to discuss several topics, of which I am receiving many e-mails.

As Bill would say "Onward!"

John for Bill

[sandi66]

Subject: Update 10/07/05
From: [e-mail]
Date: Fri, 7 Oct 2005 16:17:47 -0700

FRIZZELL LAW FIRM
305 S. Broadway, Suite 302
Tyler, Texas 75702
[phone]
E-Mail [e-mail]

Greetings Group Members,

I would like to make a few brief comments based on some calls we have received here in the office this week.

SEC Response Brief

If you have not already read the final response brief filed by the SEC you should go to the web site and review it. Leslie Hakala has spent a great deal of time pointing out to the commission the weaknesses of the case being presented by the company. The brief did not present any new points but effectively highlighted the strong points of the SEC’s case. It is my guess that the SEC is taking every opportunity to make its case known, in hopes the Commission will act sooner than later to uphold the decision of Judge Murray. There seems to be some confusion about the overall effect of deregistration, if and/or when it occurs. The delisting of a stock makes it more difficult for you and I to trade our stock. The exchanges cannot list our stock. The brokers cannot trade our stock electronically like they are accustomed to doing. Brokers and brokerage firms seem to have different ways of treating the stock as it appears in your monthly statements. There are a host of problems caused by delisting. But please understand, the stock does not become worthless merely because the stock is delisted. The company, via its officers and directors, still has their duty to you to act at all times in the best interest of the shareholders. Your stock’s value still depends on the value of the company and its

assets and abilities to make money on those assets. There are still legal requirements on the officers and directors of the company to protect and preserve the company’s assets. The company now has additional time to rebut the points raised in the brief. We will post it when we receive the same.

Crown Financial

Much speculation has gone into the Crown Financial happenings. I am anxious to learn more about the reasons for Crown’s apparent demise. We have contacted the Court and learned that the Judge today formally appointed Gary Norgaard to be the person in charge of gathering the assets, disposing of them and distributing the proceeds to the creditors. I have no experience with a dissolution proceeding like this but I am familiar with receiverships. This action is apparently necessitated due to financial losses that keep the company from being able to pay its bills. The 8k filed by the company tells us they were paying 71K a month for rent on 31,000 square feet of office space. It appears some type of eviction proceeding had begun. The Landlord was awarded possession of the space on September 25, 2005. Shareholders will lose as the stock falls. Those that have shorted this stock will win big time. Think about that one. I am attempting to get a list of the creditors. That could prove interesting. I will be glad to report to you the list of creditors when I obtain the same. There are some interesting theories floating around out there but I am reserving my thoughts for now.

Neer v. Pelino

Our office received several inquiries about at decision that came down this week from Judge Stewart Dalzell in a case styled Neer v. Pelino. The Court held that the Plaintiffs did not have a private right of action to bring the case they were bringing. The ultimate ruling was that Sarbanes Oxley did not provide the plaintiffs with a private cause of action. This case seems to be some shareholders suing management because they had mismanaged the company. The facts are not similar to the facts I have set out in our shareholders derivative rights letter. It is clear to me that this case is distinguishable on the facts. I will continue to monitor this case and those like it. I do not read this case to hold that your rights against the third party (non company) bad guys cannot be brought in a private action. Do you think the Courts are saying only the SEC can go after bad guys when a company is mismanaged? Not good law if that is the case. I do not believe this holding has any effect on claims that you as shareholders can bring against third parties responsible for damage to the company.

By the way, the company has not yet given a formal response to our shareholders derivative rights letter.

Have a good weekend.

Onward!

Bill

[sandi66]

Subject: Update 10/14/05
From: [e-mail]
Date: Fri, 14 Oct 2005 13:08:45 -0700

FRIZZELL LAW FIRM
305 S. Broadway, Suite 302
Tyler, Texas 75702
[phone]
E-Mail [e-mail]

Greetings Group Members,

This has been an interesting week as far as theories, rumors and speculations go. I cannot confirm nor deny any of the proposed theories of what is going on. Many of you have given some serious thought and due diligence to your theories. I have enjoyed discussing the possibilities with those that have called.
I have had inquiries from several shareholders regarding the passing of the response date in our shareholder derivative rights letter. I have advised you in a previous update that I have been invited to attend the next board meeting. I expect that meeting to occur reasonably soon. (Sorry but I cannot be more definite. I am sensitive to the word “soon”) I would imagine I will have the opportunity to discuss this letter at this meeting. We all want this company to succeed and overcome the problems that have plagued it. I do not want to be a distraction to anything constructive that might be ongoing at the company. Thus, I am tabling any discussion regarding the shareholders derivative rights letter at this time. I am looking forward to attending the upcoming board meeting of CMKX. In the event the company responds before this board meeting, I will of course pass any such response along to you.

I agreed to do a limited investigation into the value of the mineral estate in the acreage held by our company in Canada. I have had two geologists review the claims area for potential oil and gas benefits. We have all read and heard of the huge value of the Canadian tar sands and the many areas of Canada that are being heavily explored for oil and gas. I am mindful of rumors regarding interest in the oil exploration possibilities. I have heard there were major oil companies interested in the oil rights in our claim area. I can only report to you the findings of the geologists I asked to look at these areas for me. One of the geologists that discussed the activity in our claims area was a staff geologist for a major oil company that had been active in Canada. This geologist spent five years working in central Canada. He did not find any ongoing oil exploration in our immediate claims area. There are prolific oil and gas fields to the Southwest of our claims and a lot of production West of our claims. The areas Southwest of our claims produce out of the Williston Basin and the areas West produce out of the Canadian Basin. This does not mean this is some official determination that our claims have no oil and gas value. This is merely a report of activity that is going on at this time in the area. It appears there is not much ongoing oil and gas exploration in our claim area. If any of you shareholders with geologic experience have more or different information, please advise and I will be glad to pass your information along to the other shareholders. I have discussed this information with Mr. Stoecklein. The good news is that both geologists were quick to point out this area was in the heart of diamondiferous formations. I told these experts of our electro magnetic surveys and the reports of significant diamond discoveries and activities in the area. Both agreed our claims were located in areas that one would expect to find kimberlite. The oil and gas maps have been posted on the owners group website if you would care to view the information that was provided to me. ( www.cmkxownersgroup.com )

I was told by a clerk in the SEC FOIA office that we would be receiving a response to our lawsuit next week. This probably means a general denial (answer) will be filed. Our federal courts here in Tyler have their dockets under control. We should have a scheduling order shortly after the SEC answers. There is apparently some process that the SEC has for assigning an attorney to our claim once a lawsuit is filed. I have asked that the attorney contact me when one is assigned.

Have a good weekend.

Onward,
Bill

[sandi66]

Subject: Update 10/21/05
From: [e-mail]
Date: Fri, 21 Oct 2005 15:18:53 -0700

FRIZZELL LAW FIRM
305 S. Broadway, Suite 302
Tyler, Texas 75702
[phone]
E-Mail [e-mail]

Good Afternoon Owners Group members,

I asked Bill if I could at least get some semblance of an update out today. He gave me permission to let all of you know that he has been in meetings with the company since yesterday. He stated that they were trying to get out an 8K, but it may be as late as Monday. I asked him to really encourage the company to do so today for the sake of us all, and he said They would do their best.

I wish I had more information to share with you, but this is all I have at this time. Please refrain from calling the offices if possible as we will share any new information with you as it becomes available.

As Bill would say, “ONWARD”

John

[sandi66]

Subject: Extra Update 10/21/05
From: [e-mail]
Date: Fri, 21 Oct 2005 18:48:31 -0700

FRIZZELL LAW FIRM
305 S. Broadway, Suite 302
Tyler, Texas 75702
[phone]
E-Mail [e-mail]

CMKX Owners Group Members,
"Bill asked me to forward this information to you.

The 8K was filed with Edgar before 5:30 pm today Friday Oct 21st 2005.
It is my understanding that the 8K will not be available for public viewing until Monday morning. No information contained in it can be publicaly disseminated in light of the rules prohibiting selective disclosure.

Much effort was spent trying to get the 8K available to you today, but due to certain signatures needed and other formalities the deadline had passed."

"Onward"
Bill

[sandi66]

Subject: Pre Update Message
From: [e-mail]
Date: Mon, 24 Oct 2005 14:31:16 -0700

FRIZZELL LAW FIRM
305 S. Broadway, Suite 302
Tyler, Texas 75702
[phone]
E-Mail [e-mail]

To all CMKX Owners Group members:

Earlier today I told several shareholders that an update was due to be out in a few hours.

The office has been bombarded with calls and e-mails as you can imagine, so Bill has not been able to complete it. He has left to write in private so he can finish it and get it out this evening. I apologize for the delay, and want to thank you all for your patience with us.

John

[sandi66]

Subject: Update 10/24/2005
From: [e-mail]
Date: Mon, 24 Oct 2005 19:30:02 -0700

FRIZZELL LAW FIRM
305 S. Broadway, Suite 302
Tyler, Texas 75702
[phone]
E-Mail [e-mail]

Dear Group Members,

If you have not already done so, I would advise each of you to read the 8K filed by CMKX which was made available to the public for viewing through Edgar this morning. You will see that Urban Casavant has indicated a desire to wind up the affairs of CMKX and distribute the assets to the shareholders. Much of the 8K was prepared at Don Stoecklein’s office while I was attending the Board of Directors meeting last Friday in Las Vegas.

Board Meeting

The Board meeting was convened in Don Stoecklein’s office of the Securities Law Institute in Las Vegas. Don Stoecklein, Anthony Demint, Kristen Buck, Bob Maheu and I were present during the entirety of the meeting. Urban Casavant made his appearance by telephone and was on speaker phone for much of the meeting. We began at 10:00 a.m. and worked until about 5:30 p.m. Sandwiches were ordered in for lunch.

I am at liberty to discuss in general terms matters pertaining to the meeting and specifically to matters released in the 8K which was filed this morning. Before I go into any specifics, you should understand the circumstances leading up to my appearance at the meeting. As I told you in an earlier update (a month or so ago) that Mr. Stoecklein’s office had called my office asking if I would attend the coming board meeting. I was informed on Thursday night of the place and time of the meeting on Friday.

All material matters in the 8K, although formalized at the meeting, had been agreed to at least in principal between Urban, Stoecklein and Mahue before the meeting. This was evident during our discussions and by the dates on the agreements which were attached to the 8K. I learned of these agreements with Entourage at the same time most of you did.

My input was sought by the board on every issue discussed during the meeting. It was very important to Mahue and Casavant how I felt the shareholders would view the plan of the company. There was discussion of Urban’s failing health, but I was not given any details of any current conditions. It is my opinion that the current direction being discussed by Urban is a combination of his bad health, inability to raise capital due to the massive shorting of the company, as well as the affects of some bad decisions that were made in the early financing of the company. Based on these factors it was determined before this meeting, it was in the best interest of the shareholders to get these claims in the hands of a company that could develop these claims. Urban is very confident these claims will be developed by Entourage. Although this meeting was long in duration there was not much time spent on the mistakes of the past. More time was spent discussing the future. I felt it best for the shareholders to spend as much time as possible getting assurance that Mr. Mahue, Mr. Stoecklein and UC were in agreement to work together for the shareholders as we proceed.

Task Force

The idea of a “task force” to oversee the distribution of company assets seemed to have been born during the meetings. Urban was very much in favor of Don S., Bob M. and myself overseeing the distribution. There were alternative means of distributing the assets discussed, but a private (versus court ordered) distribution was favored by all concerned. Although Bob Mahue resigned from his Board position, he wanted the shareholders to know he would help in any way he could to see that the shareholders received the maximum benefit from the sale of the claims and the distribution of any other assets. The wording in the 8K (8.01 second paragraph) was a result of the discussions between us indicating litigation may be necessary against various third parties and Mr. Mahue wanted the shareholders to know this “task force” will use whatever resources are available to us to assist the shareholders.

I have agreed to serve with Don and Mr. Mahue on this task force, but I made it very clear that I would not forego any rights of action the shareholders might have against any person or company that may have defrauded the corporation or committed any acts to the detriment of the shareholders. By agreeing to participate on this task force, I have not waived any rights which the shareholders now have to go against any third parties. It is apparent to me that we will not receive any response to our shareholders derivative rights letter from the company. I am equally convinced there will be no action taken by the company against any third parties. Thus any rights the shareholders have accrued in this regard can now be pursued.

Company Assets

You can see from the 8K that the plan of the company contemplates distributing the Entourage stock and all other assets. It is my understanding we (Mr. Mahue and myself) will be given more details of the other assets (SGGM, UCAD, Ecuador, American Shaft, GEMM, and CIM) and their disposition. I will inform you as these matters become more clear. The response to my questions in this area were not specific and I will continue my inquiries in this area.

Certs vs. Street Name Shares

John tells me the most important question on everyone’s mind is the significance of owning shares in street name versus certs. We have received many inquiries asking if we advise people to request certificates of ownership from their broker. I have never advised anyone how you should own shares. I am not an investment advisor. You are directed to seek your own investment advice and legal advice in this area from someone knowledgeable of the benefits and detriments of owning shares in street name versus certs. My advice remains the same in this area. Having said that, please be advised that in 1.01 paragraph 2 and 8.01 paragraph 1and 2 of the 8K you are told a plan is being worked on to coordinate the distribution of the Entourage shares and other assets. I expect you to receive an 8K possibly this week which will tell you of the plan the company has for distributing the Entourage shares and other assets. The company will discuss with you the way they plan to identify who will receive this distribution. This distribution method can only be legally done in an 8K and there is ongoing discussion in this area. You will be advised of the effect of owning your shares in cert form for purposes of this asset distribution. Most of you have heard by now of the passing of Don Stoecklein’s father. I have extended our condolences to Don and his family. Don is attending a special memorial service in Washington, D.C. on Tuesday. I do not expect to hear from him on these issues in the next day or two. I have contacted Anthony Demint in his office regarding this 8K. I am hopeful this 8K setting out the distribution method will be sent out in the next day or two. Don Stoecklein’s absence may delay this filing.

Withdrawal of Appeal

You now know the company has filed a request with the SEC to withdraw its appeal of Judge Murray’s decision to revoke the registration of CMKX securities. There was very little discussion of this course of action at this Board Meeting. The Motion to Withdraw the Petition For Review was prepared before the Board Meeting. My concern is not with why the appeal has been dropped. The Motion has been filed. I expect the SEC to adopt the ruling of Judge Murray in a finality order. I do not know how long it will take the SEC to act. Since the briefings by both parties have been done on the appeal (except for the filing of the company’s final response), the SEC may decide to issue a formal written opinion on the briefs. This occurs when the briefs raise an issue that merits a written decision by the SEC. This decision will be made by the office of general counsel to the SEC. The SEC has special attorneys that handle decisions once briefs have been filed following an administrative ruling. (These are attorneys that work in a separate division from the office of enforcement – Leslie Hakala’s office) When will we know? I have no idea. I did a little research and it appears this is not a common thing for someone to withdraw their Petition For Review once review has been granted. A decision could come tomorrow or it could come months from now. The next question is the obvious one. Will trading be halted? If so, when will it be halted. My answer is the same. I do not know. When a finality order comes down, it will be sent to the market. No trading can then occur through the exchanges. Till all of the above happens, I assume trading will continue.

Calls To My Office

I have made it a policy in my office to return all calls if at all possible. For obvious reasons my office was flooded with calls today. Many of those calls have not been returned. I have been receiving calls from people who have never joined either Phase One or Phase Two. In the past I have returned many of these calls as well. For the most part they are simply shareholders wanting information. There is simply not enough hours in a day to return hundreds of calls each day from group members and non group members. The current “distribution plan” is a very unusual corporate act. I am spending time researching the law in this area and gathering ideas for proceeding effectively on behalf of the shareholders. Do not be offended if your call was not promptly returned. I hope this update answers some of the questions that have been causing this unusually large number of calls. I would expect there will be updates quite often as we proceed and I have asked John to keep me informed of the questions that appear regularly on the Boards. If you have a particular question, feel free to call or email me with the question. Leave a question with my legal assistant and I will try to get you an answer as quickly as possible. If there is an emergency of any sort, please convey such to my staff, and I will get back to you.

Onward,

Bill

[sandi66]

Subject: October 27, 2005 Update
From: [e-mail]
Date: Thu, 27 Oct 2005 14:57:02 -0700

FRIZZELL LAW FIRM
305 S. Broadway, Suite 302
Tyler, Texas 75702
[phone]
E-Mail [e-mail]

Greetings Group Members,

Due to Mr. Stoecklein's unavailability and other factors it appears there will be no new 8K at this time from the company regarding the specifics of identifying our shareholders as mentioned in the 8K on Monday of this week. I will try to get you more specific information after speaking with Don when he returns next week. I plan on asking the "Task Force" to take a multi faceted approach to the identification of our shareholders. There are shareholders that bought stock from brokers that do not report through traditional channels. The TA list and the NOBO/OBO list combined does not reveal the total of shares in the market place. All shareholders that have purchased stock from whatever source should benefit from this distribution.

I have been receiving more than the usual calls and emails asking me the question of how one should hold their shares---cert ownership vs. street name shares. I have said in many prior posts and I will say it again, I am not giving anyone advice on whether or not they should own their shares in street name or in cert form. You should talk with your financial advisors and your broker about the benefits and the drawbacks to having certs or street name shares. Common sense will tell you that a certificate of ownership duly signed by the company officers and issued by the lawful transfer agent will be ample proof of ownership to just about anyone under any circumstance. The company will be seeking a list of all shareholders as of a certain record date for the distribution. I am hopeful the company will disclose the record date in short order. I will be speaking with Mr. Stoecklein about the next meeting of the "Task Force" early next week so I can get this information to you. I do not believe those who own shares in street name (i.e. cede and company through your brokers) will be able to verify ownership by simply showing their brokerage statements to the company. Being a member of the distribution "Task Force", I should be able to answer that question for you shortly. Only the company can tell you what method it is going to use to determine ownership. When I am told of that method, Mr. Stoecklein, Mr. Maheu and I will come up with a plan to distribute the stock to the rightful shareholders. I think it will be quite interesting to work with Don and Mr Maheu to arrive at an accurate shareholder list. Now that you have seen the difficulties in gathering such information from a group this large, you know this will be no short, quick and easy task.
You can expect problems from your brokers in the event you ask for certs. We have seen three responses from three brokers and they are all different. I would like to examine these written responses as they may be important in the future. If you receive a written explanation from your broker which explains why they will not provide you with certs, I would love to have a copy. You can send it to [e-mail] .

I am getting numerous calls inquiring about the O/S. The company issued a press release early in 2005 stating that the official outstanding stock of the company was 703 Billion shares. This was based on the TA records. Some shareholders have stated there is expected to be a new O/S. If there is a new one, it will be new to me. I have never heard any mention from Don Stoecklein, Urban or Bob Maheu that the O/S is anything but what has been released by prior press releases. As always I can only say, I hope this rumor is true for all the shareholders benefit. I will be leading the dancing in the streets if there is some significant change in this number. I simply have no knowledge of any smaller O/S. There was no discussion of a new O/S at the Board Meeting last week.

I am again being asked about true evaluation of the company. There have been no financials filed by this company since 2002. I think I am safe in assuming there will be no financials filed in the future, so I do not know what the evaluation of the company's assets are. Some say that Entourage is going to release the evaluation tomorrow. I hope so. You should have that information. You should have had that information a long time ago. Having that information might help you in your decision to buy, hold or sell. I can tell you there was not one word of discussion during the board meeting last week about evaluation of the company's assets. I hope the evaluation is "to da moon" as I used to read on the boards, but I am simply out of the loop where this information is being discussed.

Many people are again asking about the naked short issue. What is the true naked short? I do not know what the true naked short position is because the brokers have failed to respond to my requests for short positions from them. I have sent out at least 10 certified letters on behalf of you as shareholders to the 10 largest brokerage houses. I have not received the courtesy of a reply from one single brokerage house. I have sued the SEC to get the fails to deliver information but have not been successful in obtaining that info from the SEC. We have examined 11 or 12 thousand shareholder statements and have totaled over 400 billion shares. We know there are nearly 60 thousand shareholders according to the NOBO/OBO list. This would suggest to me quite a few more shares in the market place than the admitted 703 billion shares. One shareholder just called my office and was very insulting to my legal assistant demanding to know what the naked short position was and stated that I knew what it was but I was not telling because I had been bought out by the market makers. Oh, pleeeeeeeeeeeeeease. Then another shareholder called and demanded to know evaluation. When Goldie said we do not have that information, she was told by some jerk that I knew it, but since I had been bought out by the company, I was not benefitting the shareholders one bit...Right...What possible reason would I have for not sharing that information with you, if I had it? We have to keep our sense of humor around here, because this goes on daily. I don't like it one bit to have to listen to such abuse, but I realize these kinds of remarks come from a very small number of individuals. I feel fortunate to have such a large group of shareholders that have a reasonable amount of common business sense and understand what is going on.
I invite your input on the plan for identifying all the shareholders of CMKX. I have learned there are some really smart people in this group. Any thoughts will be passed along to the "Task Force".

Onward,
Bill

[sandi66]

Subject: Update 10/31/05
From: [e-mail]
Date: Mon, 31 Oct 2005 15:26:30 -0700

FRIZZELL LAW FIRM
305 S. Broadway, Suite 302
Tyler, Texas 75702
[phone]
E-Mail [e-mail]

Greetings Group Members,

I am anticipating some communication from Mr. Stoecklein regarding the Entrourage distribution. I hope to hear from him today or tomorrow. I will post any information I have to you as soon as I receive something. I have no information beyond what I posted to you last week. I am ready to get to work on a plan that will finally allow us to identify all shareholders of CMKX stock. As for the rumors that a deal has been struck with some market makers, I can tell you that I am aware of no such deal. As always, I hope there is such a deal being made, but I am not privy to any information that such is occurring.

I have received a partial response from the SEC on my requests for information for the Fails to Deliver in CMKX stock. I appreciate the SEC's response but their response is incomplete at best. I plan to continue my work to get you all the information the SEC has regarding the reported fails. It appears that approximately 800 Million shares of CMKX stock were reported to the DTCC as delivery failures in the month of April of 2005. My request for the SHO reports was limited to April of '05 in hopes that I could begin to start obtaining information without meeting resistance because my requests were "overly broad". Knowing that the SEC now believes the monthly aggregate totals are appropriate to be released, I will shortly demand the monthly totals from each month beginning with January of 2005. I will let you know the SEC's response to our request for all the Fail to Deliver information. You can see the response from the SEC at www.cmkxownersgroup.com

This is a difficult time for many of you. I know it is. I sympathize with you. I am doing all that I can do with rather limited information at this point. I have heard many of you have been told to direct all of your questions to this office. If you have a specific question, please email John or try calling one of us. If we are not available, leave the question with the receptionist or my legal assistant. Contrary to the rumor mill, I am not privy to some master plan. I have no information that I have not shared with you. I have answered ten or twelve phone calls today and they all are simply seeking information and wanting to discuss possibilities. I would rather tell you of specific facts when I obtain the same from the company. It is more efficient and much less time consuming to post my information via these updates than to try to answer general questions from hundreds of callers. Those people that are suggesting to any of you that I have knowledge of some master plan should be beat with a wet rope. I do look forward to working with Mr. Stoecklein and Mr. Maheu as we proceed. You will see an update from me as soon as I know more.

Onward,
Bill