Diving Archeologists wrongfully detained by indonesian police

Froggy wrote:

> Popeye wrote:
>
>>"Matthias Voss" <mat.voss@t-online.de> wrote in message
>>news:44285271.3060100@t-online.de...
>>
> If you want something that sounds very much like the version of the
> facts peddled by the Indonesian police:
> http://www.cdnn.info/news/industry/i060309.html
>
> This version is more succint but looks a bit more balanced:
> http://www.thestandard.com.hk/stdn/s.../FK20Wd07.html


By far the best press article I found here:
http://www.liberation.fr/page.php?Article=368349

The most important clue I get from this is by the fact that
first) police divers went down th the site, then) all at
once allegedly withheld material was found on a ship, and
where the crews lodged.

Seems quite clear that the police needed to place fake
evidence, accentuated by the fact that were accompanied by
opponents form this indonesian/australien concurrent party.

Matthias





>
> I would find it difficult to believe that these divers may be
> considered as "looters" given the high-profile they gave to their
> project, that they constantly updated the authorities about the
> findings, or the fact that they had some Indonesian Marines onboard for
> protection (for good reasons: at one point in time, the Indonesian army
> had to protect the Jakarta warehouse holding the finds, against ....
> the Indonesian police).
>
> Cheers,
>
> Froggy
>

Alun Harford wrote:
> "Robert C. Helling" <robert@atdotde.iu-bremen.de> wrote in message
> news:slrne2i8g7.u07.robert@atdotde.iu-bremen.de...
>
>>I just happen to know one of the divers personally (better than I know
>>you) as he is an instructor in my club. I find your attitude somewhat
>>strange. These people specifically decided to do their excavation
>>legally in order to preserve the artefacts and make them available to
>>research and museums (besides making some money for themselves) rather
>>than use illegal methods which would make these artefacts go into dark
>>channels and effectively disappear. The whole point is that they are
>>not looters but scientists. If they "just bribe their way out" they
>>would be arrested next time again and then also charged for bribery
>>which would substantially increase the amount of cash needed to "just
>>bribe them out" for the second time otherwise not changing much.
>
>
> You've missed my point. In the west, we have taxation. You pay the tax
> people so that the police don't come and lock you up. In Indonesia, you pay
> the police etc directly. Governments need to raise income, and both systems
> work. Taxation has the disadvantage that you need far more layers of
> bureaucracy, while bribary has disadvantages with regard to fairness (people
> who cannot afford to bribe have less access to services provided by
> government).
>
> If they choose to go there and try to use the "western" system, they're
> going to get locked up, just like if somebody were to come to the west and
> try to hand out bribes.
>
> Alun Harford
>
>


BS. No government can continue with implicit funding mechanisms. If
the "direct pay" method is not explicitly required and enumerated, then
it is not only contrary to the concept of "rule of law" but it is also
arbitrary and capricious. It wouldn't take very long at all for a
government so funded to find itself the victim of "free-market forces."

After all, what's the difference between bribing an official and paying
protection money to the local "non-governmental militia"

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

"Froggy" wrote

> This being Indonesia, corruption is a possibility.

At this point, I'd say it's more of a certainty.

> However it seems (until proven otherwise, but so far there is no
> evidence) that these divers did try to do things "the right way",
> getting governmental approval in return for an an over-the-counter
> revenue sharing between the company and the government, disclosing
> their findings in real time etc... But their competitors somehow
> managed to get the police involved (and seeing the very close
> cooperation between the police and that other company, and it being
> Indonesia...).
>
> The lesson may be that it is indeed difficult to run a "clean" business
> of this nature in Indonesia, but one cannot blame the divers for having
> tried.

Agreed. I don't blame the divers. They did what they could. It seems,
however, that they missed something that has now risen up to bite them.

> Regarding the cynical view that they should have paid the necessary
> bribes, and leaving moral considerations aside, I do not believe that
> this would work. Afterwards, people know that you will pay, you weaken
> your legal position a lot, and so if you make a big find you're even
> more likely to be bullied.

Moral issues are not under discussion. Practical ones are. It appears that
the competitors, who are probably out there picking loot off the wreck as we
type had a better grasp of the practicalities than those currently
incarcerated.

Lee

Lee Bell wrote:
> "Froggy" wrote
>
> > This being Indonesia, corruption is a possibility.
>
> At this point, I'd say it's more of a certainty.
>
> > However it seems (until proven otherwise, but so far there is no
> > evidence) that these divers did try to do things "the right way",
> > getting governmental approval in return for an an over-the-counter
> > revenue sharing between the company and the government, disclosing
> > their findings in real time etc... But their competitors somehow
> > managed to get the police involved (and seeing the very close
> > cooperation between the police and that other company, and it being
> > Indonesia...).
> >
> > The lesson may be that it is indeed difficult to run a "clean" business
> > of this nature in Indonesia, but one cannot blame the divers for having
> > tried.
>
> Agreed. I don't blame the divers. They did what they could. It seems,
> however, that they missed something that has now risen up to bite them.
>
> > Regarding the cynical view that they should have paid the necessary
> > bribes, and leaving moral considerations aside, I do not believe that
> > this would work. Afterwards, people know that you will pay, you weaken
> > your legal position a lot, and so if you make a big find you're even
> > more likely to be bullied.
>
> Moral issues are not under discussion. Practical ones are. It appears that
> the competitors, who are probably out there picking loot off the wreck as we
> type had a better grasp of the practicalities than those currently
> incarcerated.

You may be correct.

OTOH the army or navy may be protecting the wreck (as they did with the
Jakarta warehouse), especially given the case's profile (or because
they had some vested interest in the sales' proceeds, who knows).

I lived in Thailand for some time and I remeber reports of a gunfight
erupting when the Thai police tried to close (or racket?) an illegal
casino ... protected by the army.

Stuff happens...

Cheers,

Froggy

"Lee Bell" <pleebell2@bellsouth.net> wrote in message
news:U4wWf.153$68.135@bignews7.bellsouth.net...
>>> 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.
>
> Governments are bribed all the time. I think there's quite a bit of
> evidence that your government was, fairly recently bribed with oil.
> Sadly, there's mounting evidence my government was too.

Got any info on that?


>
> Lee
>
>

"Popeye" wrote

>> Governments are bribed all the time. I think there's quite a bit of
>> evidence that your government was, fairly recently bribed with oil.
>> Sadly, there's mounting evidence my government was too.
>
> Got any info on that?

All I need is easily visible at the gas pump. Then there's Bush's comments
regarding America's addiction to gas. Not bad coming from a family that
made millions on that addiction. Then there's the tax breaks being given to
oil companies who claim that they have to raise prices, but who are enjoying
the highest profits in their history.

Not enough? OK, how about the lack of reaction to rapidly increasing gas
costs and the claims that it was a supply issue related to the middle east
when we have, right here in our own country, scores of untapped wells we
simply chose not to use.

Still not enough? Try this. In the Big Cypress Preserve, there's a dirt
road called Eleven Mile Road. It used to be open for people to see what the
Big Cypress looks like without spending the money to buy ATVs, Airboats or
Swamp Buggies. There's a big sign at the locked gate telling how it's been
closed do to safety and environmental reasons. The presence of endangered
Florida Panthers is specifically mentioned. According to the sign, it will
soon be returned to its natural state. It really is, by the way, part of
the range of Florida panthers. We saw their tracks near the road as
recently as last Saturday.

What the sign doesn't say is that there is one group that is allowed to use
that road, without supervision and without coming even close to the 15 mph
speed limit posted from one end of it to the other. Remember those
panthers? The one group the oil company operating 6 oil well pads at the
north end of that road. Sound like the use of federal money and federal
lands for the direct benefit of the oil industry to you? It damned sure
does to me.

Sound like something done to protect the environment? Sound like the road
really will be returned to its natural state soon? Oil pads in the
Everglades? Speeding trucks on a trucked in gravel road 4 feet above the
surrounding area? Doesn't sound real eco friendly to me.

I happen to have first hand knowledge of this because I spent most of the
day on Saturday looking for, and finding, a back way into that road. I
wanted to see what was there and, as it happens, we're having a bit of a
drought right now. The area, which is open to disbursed use (once you're
more than a mile from the highway) is normally too wet for ATV access. It's
still not easy to cross the 3 or 4 miles from the Dade Collier Transition
and Training Airport (proposed jetport that failed due to real environmental
issues), but it's possible. I know about the trucks using the road at
excessive speeds because I saw them with my own two eyes and damned near met
one of them head on. I know about the oil pads because I talked to the
driver of that truck and because I found them on Google Earth. If I get a
chance to get back before we get enough rain to make the area hard to
access, I'll find a back, legal way in and get my pictures. On Saturday,
however, I figured that, once I'd talked to the oil man, who had a radio in
his truck, on the road, probably should leave before the Park Service came
to deal with us environmentally unfriendly trespassers on their "closed for
environmental reasons" oil road.

Neither the road, nor the oil pads, are on the Big Cypress maps. They are,
however, easily visible on Google earth. If you're interested in seeing
them, open Google Earth (you may have to load it, but it's free and worth
the time) and go to N 25 59 14.10/W 80 55 05.35 with the view set to about
18000 feet (get to the coordinates first) to see the end of the roads and
the oil pads. N 25 55 36.40/ W 80 56 22.21 with the view set to about 15
miles to see the whole road.

Lee

"Lee Bell" <pleebell2@bellsouth.net> wrote in message
news:M6VWf.2730$L7.1102@bignews2.bellsouth.net...
> "Popeye" wrote
>
>>>>> Governments are bribed all the time. I think there's quite a bit of
>>>>> evidence that your government was, fairly recently bribed with oil.
>>>>> Sadly, there's mounting evidence my government was too.
>>>>
>>>> Got any info on that?
>>
>> <popeye squints>
>>
>>
>> Well, -alrighty- then...
>
>> I thought you meant some UN Oil For Food complicity or something.
>
> I did relative to the French.
>
> Come to think of it, I'm not so sure we didn't do something similar
> ourselves. Remember when they flew Osama's family out of the US right
> after the planes hit the WTC? Ever wonder what was up with that?


I never read or thought much about it, because charliekeys is the only
person I ever heard it from.

But if there was anything surreptitious there,

a) They'd have been gone long before hand, and,

b) You'd never have heard about it.



--

"The fishermen know that the sea is dangerous and the storms
terrible, but they have never found these dangers sufficient
reason for remaining ashore." - Vincent van Gogh

www.finalprotectivefire.com

It turns out that the White House approved planes to pick up the bin Ladens
and numerous other Saudis. At least six private jets and nearly two dozen
commercial planes carried the Saudis and the bin Ladens out of the U.S.
after September 13th. In all, 142 Saudis, including 24 members of the bin
Laden family, were allowed to leave the country.

Lee Bell wrote:

> My apologies for cross posting this stuff the UKRS and other lists. The
> discussion has changed and I failed to note my messages were going to a
> variety of people no longer likely to be interested.
>
> I'll try to do better.

No problem, Lee.
You'd bet your opinion is appreciated this side of the pond
as well.

Matthias