Odyssey Marine Article...

[dagfoto]

dagfoto:
I have that pic hanging in my office; entitled: "I told you so." What your pic barely shows is the top mast of another vessel--at the bottom of your pic.
Don.........

I've got the painting also .. yet whole thing wouldnt fit on the scanner, so I spliced it for the pic..

but since the stock is over $2 again .. maybe the ships not sunk - after all..

 

Amazon Forum Fav 👍

How to Research for Treasure Hunting and Metal Detecting From Lead Generation to Vetting - Grab it through Amazon!

[jeff k]

Sir Robert Balchin Made A Baron...

Sir Robert will be admitted into the House of Lords this coming Monday.

http://www.brunel.ac.uk/news-and-events/news/news-items/news-38124

Here's an older video.

http://video.foxbusiness.com/v/3882633/200-plus-years-later-adm-balchin-name-cleared/

 

[Vox veritas]

The Treasures of the Odyssey will have to go through the Arqua

The Treasures of the Odyssey will have to go through the Arqua


http://translate.google.com/transla...soros-odyssey-tendran-pasar-arqua/289998.html

 

[trinidad]

Xavier Nieto doesn't say "The Treasures of the Odyssey will have to go through the Arqua". He says "En este momento lo importante es que llegue a España. Obviamente deberían pasar por el Arqua...". Translation: At this moment, the important thing is that it (the treasure) cames to Spain. Obviously, it SHOULD go through the Arqua". Not big deal, but not the same thing.
PS: don't forget the truly reasons of Negueruela dismiss. Dangerous liaisons... and thera are not OME liaisons...

 

[Vox veritas]

Xavier Nieto doesn't say "The Treasures of the Odyssey will have to go through the Arqua". He says "En este momento lo importante es que llegue a España. Obviamente deberían pasar por el Arqua...". Translation: At this moment, the important thing is that it (the treasure) cames to Spain. Obviously, it SHOULD go through the Arqua". Not big deal, but not the same thing.
PS: don't forget the truly reasons of Negueruela dismiss. Dangerous liaisons... and thera are not OME liaisons...

The headline of the article reads that:

The Treasures of the Odyssey will have to go through the Arqua

I have translated the headline and this is the translation. Is this true?
Trinidad: please relax!
VV

 

[trinidad]

Yes, you´re right. I have to relax my self. Please, help me.

 

[Vox veritas]

Yes, you´re right. I have to relax my self. Please, help me.

Why not?
Trini
the idea of recovering the Mercedes to fill museums is not new. In 2005 it was considered and pleased, because it is a Spanish Navy frigate. This attachment is a testament to this
Cheers VV

 

[Panfilo]

I sure hope Mr. Xavier Nieto doesn´t hold his breath waiting for the Mercedes coins to get to Spain as it now seams that it is more unlikely to happen. The recent revelations on the Wikileaks internal communications have made it evident that the reasons for the US to support Spain are not founded on Admiralty law but on peripheral irrelevant issues that are not in the interest of US citizens, its shareholders or a US company working legaly recovering the cargo of a commercial ship in international waters as is permitted under the ancestral Law of Finds and Law of Salvage. It is a widely held belief in all of Spain that they¨have won¨in the courts the right to the Mercedes coins...nothing farther from the truth. I think this is due largely to the biased and irresponsible press coverage that Spain has had on this case and the public is the one that will pay for this misinformed coverage.
Panfilo

 

[MORE AND BEYOND OSSY]

I sure hope Mr. Xavier Nieto doesn´t hold his breath waiting for the Mercedes coins to get to Spain as it now seams that it is more unlikely to happen. The recent revelations on the Wikileaks internal communications have made it evident that the reasons for the US to support Spain are not founded on Admiralty law but on peripheral irrelevant issues that are not in the interest of US citizens, its shareholders or a US company working legaly recovering the cargo of a commercial ship in international waters as is permitted under the ancestral Law of Finds and Law of Salvage. It is a widely held belief in all of Spain that they¨have won¨in the courts the right to the Mercedes coins...nothing farther from the truth. I think this is due largely to the biased and irresponsible press coverage that Spain has had on this case and the public is the one that will pay for this misinformed coverage.
Panfilo

Sorry Panfilo, not a commercial ship ! Working legally What Wikileaks showed was two sides, Odyssey lied on their
export papers, and I'm sure that is what you call, tax evasion.
Ossy

 

[trinidad]

Well, I'm trying to relax my self and you, Vox, pushing and pushing to keep me alert all the time. Sinceresly, it looks like you're already working for OME. The paper you show is prove enough for me that the man in charge in the Ministry of Culture and openly and publicly hostile to Odyssey was, at the same time, a crook that was dealing with a bunch of crook's (I'm not talking of you) the way to make not only a hurry salvage (poor science about it) of the La Mercedes IN PORTUGAL, and the way he talks, gosh, I'm sure a lot of subarchs´would be embarrassed about (the filling of museums with artifacts just for the hell of it) not because it was a spanish frigate, just because LFB was (or still is) a close friend of Luis A. Valero, because LFB received "so big" gifts from Valero that embarrassed him (in Spain this is a breaking of the law. An official, a high level official, can't accept some kind of gifts . In fact, Ia's sure you know that there is a president of a Regional Gov. in Spain that is issued because there is a suspect of him accepting three pants and jackets). The situation was so organised that "expensive hotels" and some money was requested to reduce to the minimum the possible administrative adversities in Portugal, where this bunch of "salvors" had "very good contacts". It proves that LFB was sure that La Mercedes was lying close to the shore. So sure at least as becoming the soul of a salvor team, for "taking care of all permissions", all of this in Portugal. And being sure of that, LFB talk against OME and publicly sustained the version that situated La Mercedes 180 kms away. And the recovery team that worked so close to the high official of ministry of culture was, just a few months later, accused of looting in the Bahía de Cádiz, with a strange permission obtained nobody knows exactly how (or at least I don't). And you want me to relax my self, Vox? Impossible if you don't stop . And please, do it.

 

[Vox veritas]

Well, I'm trying to relax my self and you, Vox, pushing and pushing to keep me alert all the time. Sinceresly, it looks like you're already working for OME. The paper you show is prove enough for me that the man in charge in the Ministry of Culture and openly and publicly hostile to Odyssey was, at the same time, a crook that was dealing with a bunch of crook's (I'm not talking of you) the way to make not only a hurry salvage (poor science about it) of the La Mercedes IN PORTUGAL, and the way he talks, gosh, I'm sure a lot of subarchs´would be embarrassed about (the filling of museums with artifacts just for the hell of it) not because it was a spanish frigate, just because LFB was (or still is) a close friend of Luis A. Valero, because LFB received "so big" gifts from Valero that embarrassed him (in Spain this is a breaking of the law. An official, a high level official, can't accept some kind of gifts . In fact, Ia's sure you know that there is a president of a Regional Gov. in Spain that is issued because there is a suspect of him accepting three pants and jackets). The situation was so organised that "expensive hotels" and some money was requested to reduce to the minimum the possible administrative adversities in Portugal, where this bunch of "salvors" had "very good contacts". It proves that LFB was sure that La Mercedes was lying close to the shore. So sure at least as becoming the soul of a salvor team, for "taking care of all permissions", all of this in Portugal. And being sure of that, LFB talk against OME and publicly sustained the version that situated La Mercedes 180 kms away. And the recovery team that worked so close to the high official of ministry of culture was, just a few months later, accused of looting in the Bahía de Cádiz, with a strange permission obtained nobody knows exactly how (or at least I don't). And you want me to relax my self, Vox? Impossible if you don't stop . And please, do it.

Trinidad,
allegations of bribery have disappeared on "Bahía 2". THERE WAS NO BRIBERY. No senior officer is accused. Apparently you do not know or do not want to know!
I repeat, THERE WAS NO BRIBERY, forgotten, buried.
TUPET issued permits were legal (as I said, no senior official is charged). Other permits were invalid (Odyssey), but that's another story.
VV

 

[jeff k]

Sorry Panfilo, not a commercial ship ! Working legally What Wikileaks showed was two sides, Odyssey lied on their export papers, and I'm sure that is what you call, tax evasion. Greg Stemn should go to jail.
Ossy

Ossy... Do you have any idea of what you are talking about? Odyssey broke no import laws. The coins were listed at the cost of recovery. There are no taxes involved either. Import taxes are levied on goods produced in other countries, not coins salvaged from the sea. You really need to get your facts straight.

 

[MORE AND BEYOND OSSY]

Jeff, I'm sure the papers stated VALUE of goods, not cost of recovery.
I'm not sure of US tax laws. So If I started selling Tires made in Australia in the US, there would be no tax
If you are company selling imported goods in Australia you pay tax, cars carry up to 40% tariff
Our tax office ( ATO ) are looking at people buying and selling more than $3000 dollars on ebay
I've been to the States a few times, and on your Immigration papers, it asked if any goods are taken
in, and the value. And if you are taking more than 5,000 cash
Ossy

 

[trinidad]

Yes, you're right. There were no allegations against a senior official for bribery. It doesn't mean that there is not recorded conversations and writed transcriptions of it that show what was going on at the Ministry of Culture, who were friend of who, who received gifts or who uses to pass the Christmas night at home of who. But lets put it this way: change TUPET and Valero for Odyssey and, lets say, Greg Stemm. What would you say? How can I be sure that the senior official from Ministry of Culture was defending the spanish heritage and not his friends? How can a senior official from the MoC to make deals with spanish people and companies that want to be in commercial recovery of underwater heritage and, at the same time, soustain the opposite speech when he talks in public? How comes that this senior official attends all the requirements of his friend, the spanish salvor, always against Odyssey and be so soft against a band of crooks that were looting for a year under the Bay of Cádiz? Yes, there were no allegations but there are still a lot of doubts about what was going on at the MoC for a long, long time.
PS: the permit that TUPET had was for a environment research, not for an archaeological "search". And the official who signed it was removed from his job just because "he wasn't competent" to give that kind of permission.

 

[Vox veritas]

Yes, you're right. There were no allegations against a senior official for bribery. It doesn't mean that there is not recorded conversations and writed transcriptions of it that show what was going on at the Ministry of Culture, who were friend of who, who received gifts or who uses to pass the Christmas night at home of who. But lets put it this way: change TUPET and Valero for Odyssey and, lets say, Greg Stemm. What would you say? How can I be sure that the senior official from Ministry of Culture was defending the spanish heritage and not his friends? How can a senior official from the MoC to make deals with spanish people and companies that want to be in commercial recovery of underwater heritage and, at the same time, soustain the opposite speech when he talks in public? How comes that this senior official attends all the requirements of his friend, the spanish salvor, always against Odyssey and be so soft against a band of crooks that were looting for a year under the Bay of Cádiz? Yes, there were no allegations but there are still a lot of doubts about what was going on at the MoC for a long, long time.
PS: the permit that TUPET had was for a environment research, not for an archaeological "search". And the official who signed it was removed from his job just because "he wasn't competent" to give that kind of permission.

Trinidad,
moderate your words with unfounded accusations. The Spanish Constitution states that everyone is innocent until proven otherwise, and otherwise has not yet been demonstrated.
Against your "arguments" there are documents that explain everything.
For very serious matters and very embarrassing, who is hiding behind a nickname does not deserve credibility.
Cheers VV (Claudio Bonifacio)

 

[trinidad]

Vox, I'll try, I'll try. And I didn't accuse anybody. I just have doubts, serious doubts on this story. By the way, the gifts, the close relationships, the plan to go to Portugal, the double way of messure the work of OME and the work of Plangas (or TUPET or whatever), the telephone calls between the senior officer of MoC and Valero, the relationship beetween Valero and the group involved in the Bahia´s case, the media manipulation, etc, etc. All of this is documented. I don't judge if some of this things are criminal behaviours or not. I just have an opinion about it, my own opinion. And I have been reading public and false accusations about Odyssey since the very beginning of this story. I'm still waiting from some of the people who said or wrote those accusations a public correction of those lies.

PS: Vox, I wish I had met you before this mess. I'm sure you have a very interesting conversation and a lot of things to tell. Maybe some day. And I apologize if you felt offended for my words. I didn't mean it. And may I ask you for something that you mention in your last post?: Please, apply the statement "everyone is innocent until proven otherwise" to everybody, not just to the friends of your.

 

[Vox veritas]

Hi Trinidad,
thanks for your gentleness. Time will tell what is truth and many lies will be known. Take this message to re-declare that my conscience is very clean, unlike others. Those who know the lies are double crime:

1) to know and keep quiet and let other (innocent) are charged
2) to have acted illegally

All the best VV

 

[spez401]

As an attorney, I love when people make the "Nobody was charged or convicted, so there was no crime" statement. Attorneys all over the world triage cases, just like anything else. They do it based on evidence, popular opinion, and, the ever ubiquitous "personal relationships" reasons.

Making such an absolute statement, like "There was NO bribery because no senior official was charged", especially when dealing with politics and politicians, is one of the most naive statements i have ever heard. Speaking in sweeping generalizations, politicians conduct backdoor deals for their own agendas on a regular basis for many different reasons.

The US criminal laws are also based on the "Innocent until proven guilty" premise. But just because you are not charged or found "not guilty", does not mean that you are innocent.

Steve

 

[Vox veritas]

As an attorney, I love when people make the "Nobody was charged or convicted, so there was no crime" statement. Attorneys all over the world triage cases, just like anything else. They do it based on evidence, popular opinion, and, the ever ubiquitous "personal relationships" reasons.

Making such an absolute statement, like "There was NO bribery because no senior official was charged", especially when dealing with politics and politicians, is one of the most naive statements i have ever heard. Speaking in sweeping generalizations, politicians conduct backdoor deals for their own agendas on a regular basis for many different reasons.

The US criminal laws are also based on the "Innocent until proven guilty" premise. But just because you are not charged or found "not guilty", does not mean that you are innocent.

Steve

Steve,
so, what is the parameter to determine the innocence and guilt? We know of many cases where innocent people were blamed and then showed they were innocent and vice versa. I'll explain what was the issue in this case. But now Get Ready for Christmas.
Enjoy life, it is very beautiful.
VV

 

[spez401]

in·no·cent   –adjective
1. free from moral wrong; without sin; pure: ie: innocent children.
2. free from legal or specific wrong; guiltless: innocent of the crime.

not guilty -noun
1. plea of a person who claims not to have committed the crime of which he/she is accused, made in court when arraigned or at a later time set by the court.
2. verdict after trial by a judge sitting without a jury or by a jury, stating that the prosecution has not proved the defendant guilty of a crime beyond a reasonable doubt

You're confusing two things. "Innocent" is a state... completely without guilt, moral or legal. It means, in fact, that you have actually done nothing wrong. "Not Guilty" is a legal standard, and only means that the proscecution cannot PROVE, beyond a reasonable doubt, that the crime has been committed.

I'll give two very illustrative, high-profile examples: OJ Simpson and Michael Jackson. OJ Simpson was found "Not Guilty" in a criminal trial (a showboated fiasco, where the prosecution was more concerned with media coverage, than doing their job). However, he was found liable in the civil trial. Why? First, different evidentary rules for civil and criminal liabilities are different. Much of the evidence was excluded in the criminal trial base on our rules - rules that are made to protect the accused. Second, little or no media coverage. We here in the states saw much of the evidence that was excluded from the jury. Third, common sense. Do you really believe the OJ didn't kill his ex-wife? If the glove doesn't fit, you must aquit?

When Michael Jackson was officially charged with child molestation, he was found Not Guilty (after nearly two years). Again... common sense. The prosecution couldn't prove beyond a reasonable doubt that he had done it (nine counts, btw), because of evidentiary rules. It doesn't mean he was innocent. The proscecution is not allowed to bring up that he had paid two separate families, in prior instances, undisclosed sums of money (both were in excess of $10 million US) as hush money. Would you have trusted your kids, or grandkids, to staying overnight at Michael Jacksons' house?

One of my favorite arguments to use in court is the duck argument. It's great to present it to a jury. When I'm done, all I say is, "You all can see beyond all the typical lawyer games. Just remember... If it looks like a duck, walks like a duck, and quacks like a duck... it's probably a duck." Just because you're found not guilty doesn't mean you're innocent.

Steve