Diving Archeologists wrongfully detained by indonesian police

Lee Bell wrote:
> "Froggy" wrote
>
> > Given the background of these guys, unless you do have a specific
> > expertise, they probably know a lot more on how to operate there than
> > you do.
>
> Perhaps not. They don't seem to be doing too well at the moment.

Good point

> > For this type of operation, paying a bribe would probably be
> > counterproductive. They got a legitimate deal with the government. The
> > competitor bribes the police and the police gets in the way. Now if
> > they had bribed the government to start with, then they would be in
> > deep trouble because they would have no basis to counter the police
> > action. Here they can at least hope that international pressure and
> > exposure in the media will help them.
>
> Maybe they should have paid off the police too?

No, because then they would have had no recourse. What would they say
now? "it's unfair, I paid the bribe" ?

> It's pretty certain that they sould have kept the value of what they were
> recovering a bit less public.

Well, the police showed up accompanied with some guys from a competing
company so I guess someone made sure the information would reach the
"right" people.

> > And more generally, would you prefer to see underwater exploration
> > conducted in an appropriate way by professional types, or being looted
> > at the expense of scientific knowledge and artifacts conservation?
>
> How much difference is there. The articles I read seem to indicate that
> they are planning on selling the items they recover at auction, with 50% of
> the proceeds going to the Indonesian government. How does that preserve the
> scientific knowledge or artifacts?

Because (based on what I read in the press) the exploration was
conducted as a scientific project, with the artifacts retrieved being
properly registered, and they would be appropriately treated etc to
ensure proper conservation. Actually this later point is a concern as
the warehouse containing them has been sealed, but a number of
artifacts need to be treated rapidly to ensure proper conservation now
that they are out of the water.

So while the objects themselves would be sold, the corresponding
information will not be lost to historians etc.

> It seems to me that they have, in fact, established their bribes and simply
> failed to include everyone that should have been considered.

That's a bit easy. How can you know that they have bribed the
government? Actually, if this had been the case this would probably
have been exposed already, given the efforts made to trash these guys'
reputation.

Cheers,

Froggy

Lee Bell wrote:
> "Froggy" wrote
>
> > Given the background of these guys, unless you do have a specific
> > expertise, they probably know a lot more on how to operate there than
> > you do.
>
> Perhaps not. They don't seem to be doing too well at the moment.

Good point

> > For this type of operation, paying a bribe would probably be
> > counterproductive. They got a legitimate deal with the government. The
> > competitor bribes the police and the police gets in the way. Now if
> > they had bribed the government to start with, then they would be in
> > deep trouble because they would have no basis to counter the police
> > action. Here they can at least hope that international pressure and
> > exposure in the media will help them.
>
> Maybe they should have paid off the police too?

No, because then they would have had no recourse. What would they say
now? "it's unfair, I paid the bribe" ?

> It's pretty certain that they sould have kept the value of what they were
> recovering a bit less public.

Well, the police showed up accompanied with some guys from a competing
company so I guess someone made sure the information would reach the
"right" people.

> > And more generally, would you prefer to see underwater exploration
> > conducted in an appropriate way by professional types, or being looted
> > at the expense of scientific knowledge and artifacts conservation?
>
> How much difference is there. The articles I read seem to indicate that
> they are planning on selling the items they recover at auction, with 50% of
> the proceeds going to the Indonesian government. How does that preserve the
> scientific knowledge or artifacts?

Because (based on what I read in the press) the exploration was
conducted as a scientific project, with the artifacts retrieved being
properly registered, and they would be appropriately treated etc to
ensure proper conservation. Actually this later point is a concern as
the warehouse containing them has been sealed, but a number of
artifacts need to be treated rapidly to ensure proper conservation now
that they are out of the water.

So while the objects themselves would be sold, the corresponding
information will not be lost to historians etc.

> It seems to me that they have, in fact, established their bribes and simply
> failed to include everyone that should have been considered.

That's a bit easy. How can you know that they have bribed the
government? Actually, if this had been the case this would probably
have been exposed already, given the efforts made to trash these guys'
reputation.

Cheers,

Froggy

Lee Bell wrote:
> "Froggy" wrote
>
> > Given the background of these guys, unless you do have a specific
> > expertise, they probably know a lot more on how to operate there than
> > you do.
>
> Perhaps not. They don't seem to be doing too well at the moment.

Good point

> > For this type of operation, paying a bribe would probably be
> > counterproductive. They got a legitimate deal with the government. The
> > competitor bribes the police and the police gets in the way. Now if
> > they had bribed the government to start with, then they would be in
> > deep trouble because they would have no basis to counter the police
> > action. Here they can at least hope that international pressure and
> > exposure in the media will help them.
>
> Maybe they should have paid off the police too?

No, because then they would have had no recourse. What would they say
now? "it's unfair, I paid the bribe" ?

> It's pretty certain that they sould have kept the value of what they were
> recovering a bit less public.

Well, the police showed up accompanied with some guys from a competing
company so I guess someone made sure the information would reach the
"right" people.

> > And more generally, would you prefer to see underwater exploration
> > conducted in an appropriate way by professional types, or being looted
> > at the expense of scientific knowledge and artifacts conservation?
>
> How much difference is there. The articles I read seem to indicate that
> they are planning on selling the items they recover at auction, with 50% of
> the proceeds going to the Indonesian government. How does that preserve the
> scientific knowledge or artifacts?

Because (based on what I read in the press) the exploration was
conducted as a scientific project, with the artifacts retrieved being
properly registered, and they would be appropriately treated etc to
ensure proper conservation. Actually this later point is a concern as
the warehouse containing them has been sealed, but a number of
artifacts need to be treated rapidly to ensure proper conservation now
that they are out of the water.

So while the objects themselves would be sold, the corresponding
information will not be lost to historians etc.

> It seems to me that they have, in fact, established their bribes and simply
> failed to include everyone that should have been considered.

That's a bit easy. How can you know that they have bribed the
government? Actually, if this had been the case this would probably
have been exposed already, given the efforts made to trash these guys'
reputation.

Cheers,

Froggy

Lee Bell wrote:
> "Froggy" wrote
>
> > Given the background of these guys, unless you do have a specific
> > expertise, they probably know a lot more on how to operate there than
> > you do.
>
> Perhaps not. They don't seem to be doing too well at the moment.

Good point

> > For this type of operation, paying a bribe would probably be
> > counterproductive. They got a legitimate deal with the government. The
> > competitor bribes the police and the police gets in the way. Now if
> > they had bribed the government to start with, then they would be in
> > deep trouble because they would have no basis to counter the police
> > action. Here they can at least hope that international pressure and
> > exposure in the media will help them.
>
> Maybe they should have paid off the police too?

No, because then they would have had no recourse. What would they say
now? "it's unfair, I paid the bribe" ?

> It's pretty certain that they sould have kept the value of what they were
> recovering a bit less public.

Well, the police showed up accompanied with some guys from a competing
company so I guess someone made sure the information would reach the
"right" people.

> > And more generally, would you prefer to see underwater exploration
> > conducted in an appropriate way by professional types, or being looted
> > at the expense of scientific knowledge and artifacts conservation?
>
> How much difference is there. The articles I read seem to indicate that
> they are planning on selling the items they recover at auction, with 50% of
> the proceeds going to the Indonesian government. How does that preserve the
> scientific knowledge or artifacts?

Because (based on what I read in the press) the exploration was
conducted as a scientific project, with the artifacts retrieved being
properly registered, and they would be appropriately treated etc to
ensure proper conservation. Actually this later point is a concern as
the warehouse containing them has been sealed, but a number of
artifacts need to be treated rapidly to ensure proper conservation now
that they are out of the water.

So while the objects themselves would be sold, the corresponding
information will not be lost to historians etc.

> It seems to me that they have, in fact, established their bribes and simply
> failed to include everyone that should have been considered.

That's a bit easy. How can you know that they have bribed the
government? Actually, if this had been the case this would probably
have been exposed already, given the efforts made to trash these guys'
reputation.

Cheers,

Froggy

Lee Bell wrote:
> "Froggy" wrote
>
> > Given the background of these guys, unless you do have a specific
> > expertise, they probably know a lot more on how to operate there than
> > you do.
>
> Perhaps not. They don't seem to be doing too well at the moment.

Good point

> > For this type of operation, paying a bribe would probably be
> > counterproductive. They got a legitimate deal with the government. The
> > competitor bribes the police and the police gets in the way. Now if
> > they had bribed the government to start with, then they would be in
> > deep trouble because they would have no basis to counter the police
> > action. Here they can at least hope that international pressure and
> > exposure in the media will help them.
>
> Maybe they should have paid off the police too?

No, because then they would have had no recourse. What would they say
now? "it's unfair, I paid the bribe" ?

> It's pretty certain that they sould have kept the value of what they were
> recovering a bit less public.

Well, the police showed up accompanied with some guys from a competing
company so I guess someone made sure the information would reach the
"right" people.

> > And more generally, would you prefer to see underwater exploration
> > conducted in an appropriate way by professional types, or being looted
> > at the expense of scientific knowledge and artifacts conservation?
>
> How much difference is there. The articles I read seem to indicate that
> they are planning on selling the items they recover at auction, with 50% of
> the proceeds going to the Indonesian government. How does that preserve the
> scientific knowledge or artifacts?

Because (based on what I read in the press) the exploration was
conducted as a scientific project, with the artifacts retrieved being
properly registered, and they would be appropriately treated etc to
ensure proper conservation. Actually this later point is a concern as
the warehouse containing them has been sealed, but a number of
artifacts need to be treated rapidly to ensure proper conservation now
that they are out of the water.

So while the objects themselves would be sold, the corresponding
information will not be lost to historians etc.

> It seems to me that they have, in fact, established their bribes and simply
> failed to include everyone that should have been considered.

That's a bit easy. How can you know that they have bribed the
government? Actually, if this had been the case this would probably
have been exposed already, given the efforts made to trash these guys'
reputation.

Cheers,

Froggy

Lee Bell wrote:
> "Froggy" wrote
>
> > Given the background of these guys, unless you do have a specific
> > expertise, they probably know a lot more on how to operate there than
> > you do.
>
> Perhaps not. They don't seem to be doing too well at the moment.

Good point

> > For this type of operation, paying a bribe would probably be
> > counterproductive. They got a legitimate deal with the government. The
> > competitor bribes the police and the police gets in the way. Now if
> > they had bribed the government to start with, then they would be in
> > deep trouble because they would have no basis to counter the police
> > action. Here they can at least hope that international pressure and
> > exposure in the media will help them.
>
> Maybe they should have paid off the police too?

No, because then they would have had no recourse. What would they say
now? "it's unfair, I paid the bribe" ?

> It's pretty certain that they sould have kept the value of what they were
> recovering a bit less public.

Well, the police showed up accompanied with some guys from a competing
company so I guess someone made sure the information would reach the
"right" people.

> > And more generally, would you prefer to see underwater exploration
> > conducted in an appropriate way by professional types, or being looted
> > at the expense of scientific knowledge and artifacts conservation?
>
> How much difference is there. The articles I read seem to indicate that
> they are planning on selling the items they recover at auction, with 50% of
> the proceeds going to the Indonesian government. How does that preserve the
> scientific knowledge or artifacts?

Because (based on what I read in the press) the exploration was
conducted as a scientific project, with the artifacts retrieved being
properly registered, and they would be appropriately treated etc to
ensure proper conservation. Actually this later point is a concern as
the warehouse containing them has been sealed, but a number of
artifacts need to be treated rapidly to ensure proper conservation now
that they are out of the water.

So while the objects themselves would be sold, the corresponding
information will not be lost to historians etc.

> It seems to me that they have, in fact, established their bribes and simply
> failed to include everyone that should have been considered.

That's a bit easy. How can you know that they have bribed the
government? Actually, if this had been the case this would probably
have been exposed already, given the efforts made to trash these guys'
reputation.

Cheers,

Froggy

Lee Bell wrote:
> "Froggy" wrote
>
> > Given the background of these guys, unless you do have a specific
> > expertise, they probably know a lot more on how to operate there than
> > you do.
>
> Perhaps not. They don't seem to be doing too well at the moment.

Good point

> > For this type of operation, paying a bribe would probably be
> > counterproductive. They got a legitimate deal with the government. The
> > competitor bribes the police and the police gets in the way. Now if
> > they had bribed the government to start with, then they would be in
> > deep trouble because they would have no basis to counter the police
> > action. Here they can at least hope that international pressure and
> > exposure in the media will help them.
>
> Maybe they should have paid off the police too?

No, because then they would have had no recourse. What would they say
now? "it's unfair, I paid the bribe" ?

> It's pretty certain that they sould have kept the value of what they were
> recovering a bit less public.

Well, the police showed up accompanied with some guys from a competing
company so I guess someone made sure the information would reach the
"right" people.

> > And more generally, would you prefer to see underwater exploration
> > conducted in an appropriate way by professional types, or being looted
> > at the expense of scientific knowledge and artifacts conservation?
>
> How much difference is there. The articles I read seem to indicate that
> they are planning on selling the items they recover at auction, with 50% of
> the proceeds going to the Indonesian government. How does that preserve the
> scientific knowledge or artifacts?

Because (based on what I read in the press) the exploration was
conducted as a scientific project, with the artifacts retrieved being
properly registered, and they would be appropriately treated etc to
ensure proper conservation. Actually this later point is a concern as
the warehouse containing them has been sealed, but a number of
artifacts need to be treated rapidly to ensure proper conservation now
that they are out of the water.

So while the objects themselves would be sold, the corresponding
information will not be lost to historians etc.

> It seems to me that they have, in fact, established their bribes and simply
> failed to include everyone that should have been considered.

That's a bit easy. How can you know that they have bribed the
government? Actually, if this had been the case this would probably
have been exposed already, given the efforts made to trash these guys'
reputation.

Cheers,

Froggy

mike gray wrote:

> Matthias Voss wrote:
>
>> Dear friends,
>> it is time to act.
>>
>> Professional Archeologists and Divers, who operated with consent,
>> contracts and licenses issued by Indonesian authorities and
>> government, to explore a shiwpwreck site in Indonesian waters, have
>> been recently detained by the local police in Indonesia.
>
>
> Where were you when Mel Fisher went through essentially the same BS?
>

Not reborn yet.

Greets,
Matthias

mike gray wrote:

> Matthias Voss wrote:
>
>> Dear friends,
>> it is time to act.
>>
>> Professional Archeologists and Divers, who operated with consent,
>> contracts and licenses issued by Indonesian authorities and
>> government, to explore a shiwpwreck site in Indonesian waters, have
>> been recently detained by the local police in Indonesia.
>
>
> Where were you when Mel Fisher went through essentially the same BS?
>

Not reborn yet.

Greets,
Matthias

mike gray wrote:

> Matthias Voss wrote:
>
>> Dear friends,
>> it is time to act.
>>
>> Professional Archeologists and Divers, who operated with consent,
>> contracts and licenses issued by Indonesian authorities and
>> government, to explore a shiwpwreck site in Indonesian waters, have
>> been recently detained by the local police in Indonesia.
>
>
> Where were you when Mel Fisher went through essentially the same BS?
>

Not reborn yet.

Greets,
Matthias