Register for free to join our community of investors and share your ideas. You will also get access to streaming quotes, interactive charts, trades, portfolio, live options flow and more tools.
Register for free to join our community of investors and share your ideas. You will also get access to streaming quotes, interactive charts, trades, portfolio, live options flow and more tools.
IMO, the Juno Beach permit is in jeopardy not only from a B.A.R. stand point, but the Admiralty Claim holder is contending now that SFRX has not performed as agreed on. The Permit is being held up for a myriad of different reasons, all of which SFRX had control over to begin with and failed on later.
IMO, SFRX is spending investor money right and left for lawyers fending off lawsuits which SFRX could have settled years ago. But, they insist on fighting rather than resolving anything.
BTW, any merger with another entity, under the laws of this State, makes the new merging entities possibly just as responsible for SFRX's previous actions. Meaning, the new companies when the mergers are solidified, will open themselves up possibly to all the litigation that is current or contemplated.
Only one former diver that used to work for SFRX worked for the Fisher family. I hired the guy, so I should know.
Secondly, SFRX's assets and equipment are leveraged to the hilt with liens and encumbrances. SRFX's only asset is the vessel called the "Iron Maiden" which had cost over-runs, upgrades and repairs so high, it almost single handedly sunk the company during my tenure. Additionally, it is one of the most dangerous boats in this industry to date. There were only (3) people who ran, or could run that boat, I was one of them, but it never reduced the potential for fatal accidents due to the wrong kind of boat it is for this work.
Thirdly, the Iron Maiden is not an asset, it’s a liability on (2) fronts; One, it’s dangerous. Two, it has so much money tied into it, it’s a loss leader that will never be recovered. Further, SFRX owns only a handful of pieces of equipment used in this industry. All of the equipment used was that of its staffing at the time.
SFRX's Attorney's office in Tampa, confirmed last week, SFRX HAS NO divers or employees in Juno Beach currently on its payroll, since they are actively seeking funds to handle operating costs which they do not currently have.
IMO, I think last week's Flat Line trading, or the lack of trading thereof, speaks to the fact that press releases, letters of intent, etc., are just nothing but lip service. It's going to take profound results for SFRX to move forward.
IMO, SFRX's latest bit of news doesn't make sense. Here's why;
Why, if I have a unique contract with a foreign government to search for treasure wrecks, would I just hand off a portion of my company's stock if a company like SFRX has no track record, no assets, no experience and no money?
IMO, The only thing I can see coming in this is not to find treasure in metals beneath the water, but to find treasure on paper called "stock." But, so far, every single time, without exception, there has been an SFRX press release, the stock has stifled, or at best, went up and down like a shallow roller coaster.
Here is the link for this morning's press release.
http://ih.advfn.com/p.php?pid=nmona&article=45191824&symbol=SFRX
There you go, SFRX made another announcement this morning at 9:30AM(EST).
Hopefully, this will stimulate more than just Flat Line Trading.
The point is being missed here. Seafarer specifically announced;
"Seafarer Exploration Corp. (OTCBB: SFRX) announced today they have retained Robert H. (Bobby) Pritchett III the CEO of Anchor Research & Salvage to assist Seafarer locate and review a joint venture, merger or acquisition opportunity"
SFRX did not announce a partnership in the (30) month contract in the Dominican Republic. They said they "retained" Mr. Pritchett, not merged with him, not partnered with him, etc.
The announcement released by SFRX on this subject is only propsecting. It's not hunting as of yet and did not have provisions in it that said anything more or anything less.
Additionally, Mr. Pritchett and A.R.S. in their press release did not mention SFRX or anyone a part of SFRX in the DR contract with the government there.
They merely retained Bobby to help them chart a better course to try and develop some new opportunities.
Here is the link to the A.R.S. press release;
http://forum.treasurenet.com/index.php/topic,358677.0.html
ARS or Anchor Research and Salvage announced this new agreement (30) month term with the Dominican Republic on Oct 24, 2010, but it wasn't until today that SFRX's involvment with ARS was made public. So, I guess time will tell.
IMO, the movement of the stock this morning is sluggish, so I'm not sure what that means or represents. Only time will prove if this has been a good move for SFRX or not.
Here is the memorandum to SFRX's CEO after July's Meeting in 2009. After this memo went out, it wasn't long after that I was put on medical leave of absense. I have not edited it, censored it or changed it in any way. Quite frankly, I should've posted this a long time ago.
Kyle,
After yesterday’s meeting with you and the others, I have great concern that we are potentially misleading the investors and the shareholders. I want no part of this. You cut me off on the phone on your way back to Tampa as if to prevent me getting into specifics that you don’t want the investors to know about. Plus, your threat about my employment to keep quiet on certain things was an insult. You, Chris and Pelle know better than to threaten me in any way and if Pelle keeps threatening and yelling at me, I’m going to punch his lights out. Keep him out of my way from now on, I mean it Kyle.
Everyone of us told you yesterday that this site is practically worthless and if nothing else, we cannot get to the mag hits that are charted. Plus, the only mag hit we ever reached was no more than a rust plume that was a left-over lobster trap. If we take into account Kevin’s testimony on this site, over 500 of the targets are these stupid traps from back in the early 80’s. I might also add like I said in the meeting, if the State finds out we’ve been working outside the permit area, we could lose our permit to work anywhere inside or outside this site from this point on.
After all I have sacrificed and done for this company, you made it clear today, that now, amongst everything else, you want me to “keep my mouth shut” when it comes to scientific details a part of the wreck site that could have an adverse effect on investor confidence. No way Kyle. Not today, not tomorrow, not in the future.
How can we, as a company, know that we cannot reach the mag hits, yet tell investors something entirely different and lead them on? Please, if I missing something here, tell me. I’m no stock wizard, but I know that if we don’t tell the truth and hide certain facts, we’re probably committing fraud and I will not be party to that in any way, shape or form. That Kyle, you are on your own about. Don’t drag me into it or expect me to participate in it. I’m not that way, and you and Chris damn well know it.
You do what you have to, but I’m telling you right now Kyle, if this continues, I will write a letter to the S.E.C. and make them aware of my concerns. And as of today, I will no longer sign anything that goes to the State of Florida, nor will I act in the capacity of Director of Operations. I will not go down with this ship.
I would expect Kyle, that we should talk about this and this time I will not be rushed off the phone with you.
Sean (Reef Dawg)
Captain/DOO
Cc: Pelle’, Kristen, Jim, Chris, Frank, Victor
Isn't it odd, that certain people blame the downward spiral of SFRX per share value on me, when in fact, right before my being placed on medical absence by SFRX in August, the stock was healthy, then, when word started to get out that SFRX and I were parting company, the stock started to tumble and hasn't recovered since.
And not until my official departure from SFRX in November of 2009, was anything made public. Hmm, makes you think. If I said nothing publicly before November of 2009, why did the stock take a dive (excuse the pun) starting in July of 2009?
Isn't that the same month, after a mandatory company (SFRX) meeting in Tequesta, Florida, there was an inter-office memorandum circulated when it was announced that we could not, and would not ever reach the Mag hits on the Juno Beach Wreck Site and therefore, to continue promoting the Juno Beach site would be less than ethical, legal or responsible with our investors, past, present and future?
Another major dip in the share value was around the time that an SFRX Advisory Board member and large investor/shareholder committed suicide on February 14th, 2010. This man was a decent and fine human being and to this day, I was proud to have been his friend.
So stop playing the blame game. SFRX has done much of this to itself with no help from anyone else.
You mean this Transfer Agency Shorty81?
http://www.sunbiz.org/scripts/cordet.exe?action=DETFIL&inq_doc_number=L09000022042&inq_came_from=NAMFWD&cor_web_names_seq_number=0000&names_name_ind=N&names_cor_number=&names_name_seq=&names_name_ind=&names_comp_name=CLEARTRUST&names_filing_type=
Which is owned by SFRX's CEO's daughter and her husband?
Is that the one you mean Shorty?
I thought so!
Your cousin Shorty is our new Governor? Wow, now I have truly heard it all. I guess when it comes to SFRX things will never cease to amaze me. I guess if your cousin is our new Governor, SFRX shouldn't have any problems getting their permit renewed with Tallahassee. LOL
You mean the same Transfer Agency that SFRX's CEO owns with his eldest daughter and son in law called "Cleartrust, LLC?"
You mean the same Transfer Agency that refused to issue me replacement stock on (2) separate occassions in late 2009 and the first month of 2010?
You mean the same Transfer Agency that prior to the stock being stolen, refused to remove the restrictive legends under rule 144 off it in July of 2009, so I could sell it?
Is that what you're talking about Shorty?
So Oilbird, are you saying that the UNESCO agreement has been bypassed with Columbia, and in addition to Columbia, not only one, but many Caribbean Countries have also nullified their agreements under the UNESCO Treaty to sign agreements with SFRX and another mystery Treasure Company?
Additionally Oilbird, are you saying that SFRX and this other mystery company, for the first time in decades, has not only secured these rights from these various countries, when no one in the United States has ever done so before after UNESCO was signed, which is dare I say is HUGE NEWS, but that they also told you first about it? You must really be an important fellow, or employed by SFRX, or dare I say, SFRX yourself?
And my last question;
Where in God's name did you ever get a ridiculous agreed upon boundary footage of 3000 feet or 900 plus meters? Wow, that's a new one on me. You know what, I believe that is a new one in the history of the Treasure Hunting Industry. SFRX must be some kind of special company to pull that one off.
BTW, just to enlighten you, no country would ever sign an agreement with a private or public American company unless the company already had established monetary foundations prior to any agreements being signed. No one is dumb enough to sign away treasure rights if the company they are signing with doesn't have any capital to work with, explore with or recover with. Even in America, trust funds are established prior to agreements being signed which SFRX has not had the money to do.
Numerous calls have been made to get this done. Numerous attempts have been made to have them replaced through SFRX's attorneys, but has not been done. Letters have been written to get this done, but they have been flatly ignored. So, what is one person supposed to do?
As you are aware, or maybe you're not, if Seafarer issues the stock, then they have admitted to the knowledge of the theft which they claimed never happened and because of a certain e-mail that was written in late 2009 by one of their upper level management employees, they would be held in contempt of court relating to an ongoing case in Hillsborough County.
Shorty, please, save your spin and rhetoric for that multi-party lawsuit you threatened me with. You know nothing of which you speak, nor have an opinion about it that even resembles anything intelligent. Thousands of people lost their dreams in that case and I was the only one who fought for them. David and Goliath. (Samuel I) Every read that story?
Same thing here with SFRX, and maybe in the end, I'll get out-lawyered again, but the fact remains, I will always stand up, do what I believe in and NEVER back down. I am very, very proud of that case and over 9,000 regular citizens thanked me for the sacrifices I made to lead it, fight through it and represent their cause.
I was only 30 at the time and was already the Vice President of a Florida Resort, but I paid tremendous dues to take up the issues that favored the common man as I have now. SFRX has thousands of investors and if even one is spared losing everything on a "pipe dream," then I will be satisfied.
By the way, they (City of Port St. Lucie) had millions to spend and the best Tallahassee lawyers money could buy to fight us, when in comparison, we had only spare change. So, in the end, we did pretty darn good.
We really didn't lose. We were heard. It led to hundreds of future cases to cite our cause and case and not since then, has one single municipality, county, taxing district or the like, tried to pull the "wool over the eyes" of their constituency like they did in that case. So, I guess it's how you define "loss." I considered it a major victory for the little guy.
There is no tangent Shorty. That is the only case that is relevant to what your are speaking about.
I'm sorry, I posted the wrong link to the Supreme Court Case. Here is the proper and complete link;
http://www.law.fsu.edu/library/flsupct/84917/84917.html
You know what Shorty, there is just no getting through to you. So, I guess I really shouldn't try to.
Again Shorty, you're simply not telling the truth. There was no lie to a Judge. There was no lie in a Court of Law. There was no lie to a Jury, there was no lie to any Law Enforcement Officials. The fact is, the lie (my mistake) was in a deposition in which an administrator for a municipality asked me a question about my employer and I simply didn't tell him the truth. The issue was relating to a Special Assestment District issue and the collaterization feature using people's home and property as collateral in securing Bonding at favorable ratings and their defeasence in (30) years at a refinance. It was a multi-billion dollar project that wrecked the lives of thousands of people and led to thousands of people losing their homes and properties because they could not afford the forced assestments and weren't given the opportuinity to vote on the issue.
The Florida Supreme Court case, that I, by the way represented for the common person was;
https://taxlaw.state.fl.us/view.aspx?id=2018466&file=pta_cc02&format=3&banner=Property%20Tax%20Oversight%20-%20Court%20Cases%20(1990%20-%201999)
and
http://www.law.fsu.edu/library/flsupct/89448/89448ans.pdf
The case was (7) years of legal battles, 33,000 pages long, over 850 national, state and local news stories about it and led to sweeping reforms relating to people's rights with the expansion of capitol projects (municipalities) in the State of Florida. And I can proudly say, I was the one who brought it to the punch.
Now, what will you try and lie about? There is too much falsity on here when I speak the truth. I understand why though, just like you, and the rest of you, I believed in someone and they steered me in the wrong direction, so I guess I can't blame you for trying. But please, speak the truth, don't make up things as you go along.
Do like I do, base things on facts, not conjured fiction.
There are no mental issues as you accuse in your post. What you are referring to is a severe head trauma I sustained in August of 2009 in an attack on me by a disgruntled former Seafarer employee who was owed money by SFRX and who chose to use me to vent his anger. The copy of the medical files a part of that attack were stolen from my residence in late 2009. So, it begs the question; do you in fact know the person who stole those records?
As to an arrest record, I have never hidden from anyone the truth of my past. All of us have made mistakes and I happened to make one dumb, youthful, stupid mistake in 1996. That's (14) years ago for whoever is doing the math. There has been nothing since to date. I know one thing, I will never again protect a scammer from their just rewards of justice by remaining silent to protect them.
That is the very reason why I blew the whistle early on in July of 2009 against SFRX. I did not want to repeat the past mistake I made in the 90's. And this time, unlike the case in the 90's, I immediately went forward with the information to the proper authorities and continue to do so to this day.
Why do you think I have created such a monstorous paper trail?
Yes. SFRX's current CEO made dozens upon dozens of threats against people who were angry with him and Seafarer at various times over the past (5) and more years.
I personally was witness to over (2) dozen of those threats by SFRX's current CEO against unhappy and accusatory investors, former partners and former employees. Anytime someone called to task SFRX's business practices, those very words were used with great fluency and meant to intimidate the other party.
This tactic and threats by SFRX's current CEO actually began much earlier in 2003 after a scathing finding by the SEC against SFRX's current CEO. Here is a link to the decision;
ORDER INSTITUTING ADMINISTRATIVE AND CEASE-AND-DESIST PROCEEDINGS, MAKING FINDINGS, AND IMPOSING REMEDIAL SANCTIONS AND A CEASE-AND-DESIST ORDER PURSUANT TO SECTIONS 15(b) AND 21C OF THE SECURITIES EXCHANGE ACT OF 1934.
http://www.sec.gov/litigation/admin/34-47403.htm
Again, I don't just make these things up. I research many things and gather hard facts before I bring them to the attention of the public.
Yes, I most certainly am a Whistle Blower. Read the definition below to be enlightened.
A whistleblower is a person who raises a concern about wrongdoing occurring in an organization or body of people. Usually this person would be from that same organization. The revealed misconduct may be classified in many ways; for example, a violation of a law, rule, regulation and/or a direct threat to public interest, such as fraud, health/safety violations, and corruption. Whistleblowers may make their allegations internally (for example, to other people within the accused organization) or externally (to regulators, law enforcement agencies, to the media or to groups concerned with the issues).
Whistleblowers frequently face reprisal, sometimes at the hands of the organization or group which they have accused, sometimes from related organizations, and sometimes under law.
Think again everyone. What is happening to me is a classic and textbook example of reprisal and corporate mobbing.
I certainly look forward to your legal threats being brought and finally having a chance to prove my allegations, opinions, facts and the like out in a Court of Law against you and who ever else makes the mistake to join your little legal crusade.
I must correct you though on something as you tend to get your facts mixed up;
The hearing on November 22nd of this month is on a different matter. It is a second part and continuation of a past hearing and has nothing to do with, in your words, "tortious interference" which happened to be a favorite threat against others by SFRX's current CEO. How strange or coincidental is that if I may ask?
Since you used those words, I need to enlighten you as to their meaning. Tortious interference occurs when a person intentionally damages the plaintiff's contractual or other business relationships. This tort is broadly divided into two categories, one specific to contractual relationships (irrespective of whether they involve business), and the other specific to business relationships or activities (irrespective of whether they involve a contract).
I have done none of what is defined. I am a "whistle blower," nothing more and nothing less.
Remember something else, anyone bringing suit against another party (myself) makes those individuals or businesses also subject to a counter suit. And, if there are deep pockets involved, I will have a better chance at retaining a lawyer than the persons bringing the initial action against me.
If I had my preference, I would much rather see a Federal lawsuit as the stakes are much higher and more rewarding financially and otherwise.
You asked me to answer your questions and I did. Now IMO, you went off topic with your most recent posting relating to my answers and are yet again, losing track with what you yourself asked.
Answer to Post #1476. Sorry, but I do have other things to do during the day.
Here's my answers;
You stated and asked -
You were an employee at Seafarer that was released from his duties for reasons the company thought valid but you did not correct?
Not true. SFRX in fact contends to this day I wasn't an employee, but a sub-contractor, which I disagree with and the applicable statutes also reinforce my position. As to the second part of your question, SFRX's CEO would not allow management to do their jobs. He micro-managed everything without prior experience and/or knowledge of this industry and created the dilemmas SFRX is now faced with.
You stated and asked;
Since that time you have done things such as call the State of FL, write to the State of FL and post numerous messages on this board to avenge what you believe is a wrong by them letting you go correct?
There is no vengeance as you imply. Secondly, I do admit to stating a cause of action with the State of Florida to protect myself against future action taken against the company in which I was in upper level management for a period of years. Meaning, when I found things wrong, or improper or more serious, I told the truth and did not want the State to think I was involved, which I never was.
Lastly you stated and asked;
Is it possible that these things have adversely affected the stock price?
The only thing that has affected stock price and share value is the actions of inept current management, inaccurate public information by SFRX, a complete disconnect from large investor interests, improper approaches to operating in the field of maritime exploration and a failed hunt for treasure in Juno Beach. None of the above happened on my watch or under my authority while still with the company. Further, all I can do is post my opinions and facts and past experiences with SFRX and allow others to make a decision on their own.
I currently have no stock in SFRX. My issued stock was stolen in November of 2009 from my residence and SFRX has not to date, issued any replacement stock. None of which speaks to the fact that I am owed much more than what was stolen. Additionally, all stock issued by SFRX to its employees and others, all carried restrictive legends that were not removed therefore preventing the stock being sold.
Now, have I answered your questions?
So we again stick to the facts, here is, in SFRX's words and public release, the more than (5) year fact.
Seafarer Exploration Corporation, a Delaware Corporation, was incorporated on May 28, 2003. The Company formerly operated under the name Organetix, Inc. On July 17, 2008, the Company changed its name from Organetix, Inc. to Seafarer Exploration Corp. The Company's main business plan is to develop the infrastructure to engage in the archaeologically-sensitive exploration and recovery of historic shipwrecks. The exploration and recovery of historic shipwrecks is by nature extremely speculative, and there is a very high degree of risk inherent in this type of business venture. The exploration and recovery of historic shipwrecks involves a multi-year, multi stage process and it may take several years and/or be prohibitively expensive to locate and recover valuable artifacts, if any are located at all, from historic shipwreck sites. There are very strict international, federal and state laws that govern the exploration and recovery of historic shipwrecks.
Here is the link for this information so that all can verify my posting and facts;
http://www.answers.com/topic/seafarer-exploration-corp
Actually, my family was raised hunting treasure and owning sites on inland properties. The first being that of property near the Battle of Bull Run in which we allowed prospecting on our extensive acreage and would in turn charge a fee for each artifact that was found.
And I must make a correction on here; I've owned several successful businesses to include (2) restaurants, a Dance Club and have currently another business that is flourishing and beyond the development stage. So, I'm not really sure why some continue to "spin" inaccuracies about me.
And, I must make one more correction on here; SFRX has in fact been around for more than (5) years. So, let's make sure we stay in focus on the facts.
Remember something very important;
Treasure is not always Gold, nor is all Treasure found in the Sea.
This company, although it has made many, if not numerous mistakes in its infancy, can shake off its past by inciting new energy by properly planned and executed projects. There is no reason in the world that such time should lapse without the boats leaving the dock and the crew members working. If the Juno Beach Wreck Site has become a burden, release it and move on to greener pastures.
There is a myriad of different ways this company can move forward in a productive and profitable way, yet it (SFRX) has the Juno Wreck Site dictating its very future. This is a very shallow and dangerous way to operate. It should say to anyone watching that the Juno Site is its only current opportunity.
I don't work for SFRX any longer, so I won't start to write a business model for their upcoming year, but if they would step outside the box and use some forward thinking, they could be utilizing their operational equipment and crew right now at this very moment, so that their down times realize alternative capitol influx and not a consistent stream of expenditures with no return, dismal quarterly filings and no new news in over (5) years. And yes, their alternative positive movements would be in the same industry.
We all know on here how easy it is to manipulate stock and show a climb when it is in fact, not so.
My God, the rhetoric on here is almost toxic. But, everyone is right about one thing;
There is news coming, but it might not be what you think. Seafarer is a glance blow of this Industry (Treasure), and not one single employee of theirs, to include the CEO has a lick of background in this business.
Sure, you can finance a venture, problem is, who's to say those handling the dollars have knowledge to guide those expenditures rightfully and profitably?
One only needs to look at the past, all the broken promises, lawsuits facing this company and it's short lived fiasco in Juno Beach to know this will never work on its current course. Sorry for the pun.
In my heart, it amazes me to no end that someone can take a portion of my posting and twist it to say what you did Shorty81. To this date, the B.A.R. still has a current formal complaint against SFRX filed by me which they have not ruled on officially. Also, you ever so skillfully skipped over in my posting where I state that the e-mail from the B.A.R. was part of a series of e-mails, but I am not permitted to post the others.
NO ONE WILL "EGG ME ON" TO BREAK THE LAW. I know that's what is going on. Discredit me till I get angry enough to post certain pieces of evidence only to have SFRX go to the authorities investigating them and show them what I have done and have me thrown in jail. NO WAY PILGRIM.
AND YES, the paperwork was in fact found to be faked and my name used without permission. Additionally, SFRX claimed that their Archeologist was on site when he in fact was in the United Kingdom for the dates shown on the Official Documents in Spetember filed by SFRX. How are they going to explain that one? That fact alone can cause SFRX to not have their permit renewed.
This is only some facts among many, many others, that one day, God willing, will become public through findings and I will breathe a sigh of relief that SFRX will be held to task and not allowed to victimize anyone else like they have me and hundreds of others, if not thousands of others.
As everyone is well aware, the truth can be a very painful thing. And being a "whistle blower" can be the worst possible thing to be when someone has clear hindsight. I know one thing, SFRX has taught me one thing, "if you're going to blow the whistle on a corporation, you'd better be ready to have your life ruined along the way."
Here is the letter from the B.A.R. in which they confirmed that the data (log forms) carried my name and were signed with my signature without my permission. This is FORGERY for all of you who wonder. I have copied and posted it in its entirety.
I would note one thing here, I NEVER gave anyone at Seafarer the right in August to use my name, sign my name or represent my name, so in fact, the B.A.R. did find that my name was recorded without my knowledge or permission.
I NEVER FILLED OUT ANY FORMS IN THE MONTH OF AUGUST 2009. All logs, paperwork and the like submitted to the State of Florida must be signed by (2) entities, the Captain of the operations and the Archeologist that is on site during those operations. These logs in August of 2009 were submitted to the State without my permission and someone other than myself forged my name on the documents. THESE ARE THE FACTS! And, I was still employed with SFRX at that time in August 2009, but not until the early part of 2010 was I made aware that false information was given to the State that I had NO PART OF.
In fact, the logs from August 2009 that were supposedly signed by me didn't have my fingerprints on them, but the fingerprints of (2) other SFRX employees.
There are (5) other e-mails in this series, but they contain information that is privvy to an ongoing investigation and it would be criminal for me to post them and could be considered "obstruction of justice" among other things.
Dear Mr. Murphy,
In regards to your 1st concern, your complaint is of a criminal nature and our agency has no law enforcement authority to offer “immunity”. I recommend consulting with your lawyer about such concerns. We can only assist law enforcement once they request our help.
I can confirm your second concern. After reviewing your public records information request; Seafarer’s logs for the month of August have you recorded as the captain, but the logs of September and later do not.
Please feel free to keep us posted and send me any questions, but understand there are specific legal protocols the Division must follow.
Sincerely,
Dan McClarnon
Daniel McClarnon
Underwater Archaeologist
FL Bureau of Archaeological Research
1001 deSoto Park Drive, Tallahassee FL 32301
850.245.6335
Please take a few minutes to provide feedback on the quality of service you received from our staff. The Florida Department of State values your feedback as a customer. Kurt Browning, Florida Secretary of State, is committed to continuously assessing and improving the level and quality of services provided to you. Simply click on the link to the "DOS Customer Satisfaction Survey." Thank you in advance for your participation. DOS Customer Satisfaction Survey
You're forgetting that the B.A.R. in February of this year in fact found that Seafarer had forged official State documents for the month of August of 2009.
This is a fact, not some "poppycock" or opinion. Mr. Wheeler's Office at the B.A.R. sent written confirmation on Wednesday Feburary 10th, 2010, at 7:49AM (EST) of this finding through a Mr. McClarnon and urged me to seek criminal charges against Seafarer for the forgery through the F.D.L.E.. I chose not to, because at the time, I was trying to work things out with SFRX.
This may be perhaps one reason they (B.A.R.) are not renweing the permit in haste.
Perhaps Oilbird, you'd be kind enough to be more specific? It's my understanding you're directly representing Seafarer, their sources or both.
Please be good enough to add some credibility to your postings. I stuck up for you on here with your announcement last week, but there were those that challanged you on your postings.
In fact, Seafarer's Lawyers accosted me in my personal e-mail last week and made some pretty nasty threats to inlcude sanctions and contempt of court. No worries here though, attorneys are only bullies when they're lying.
Yes Shorty81, I did in fact have my laptop in the Hospital which has WiFi service for their patients. I had to have it there. I have bills to pay and I'm not rich by any means, SFRX has made sure of that.
Yes Shorty81, you are right about that. See, again, I'm always honest. I stand corrected on my earlier post about the removal of Oilbird's announcement.
Thank you for clarifying that for us on this forum. Again, my apologies.
If you know this or not Shorty81, SFRX's CEO is in fact from Arkansas. So your posting is senseless. OIlbird also said he was friend of Jim Alexander who is the former President for SFRX. Did you know that?
BTW, why did you post on another site that you're following me and then making false accusations against me when I was in fact in a Hospital recovering from surgery to directly hurt my Fiance'?
Would you like me to post what you wrote on that other Forum?
On Tuesday, August 17th, 2010 at 3:43PM (EST) I was contacted by a male person who identified himself as "Oilbird." The call originated in Arkansas from the phone records.
After he introduced himself on the phone, he explained that he was calling to ask me why I was "so bent on doing Seafarer harm?" In a very short response, as I have said to everyone before, what I say is my opinion and based on experiences and research. The gentleman then asked what it was that "I wanted from all of this?" I told him I didn't know him from Adam, his response was very clear, he stated he was involved with SFRX as both an investor and a paid consultant/representative for SFRX and thier Press Releases and "promoting the company." After he said that, I asked him his name, he declined saying it "wasn't important," so I ended the conversation.
This Shorty81 is why I have stated what I have about Oilbird.
By the way, why was Oilbird's announcement removed from this site? Now we are being selective as to how certain announcements are made and responded to?
IMO, it's very unfair. Oilbird spoke yesterday as representing information for Seafarer (SFRX) and when I shot it down with factual information about UNESCO, it was totally removed and isn't even visible in any of the site's records. Seems awfully extreme to me. Why wasn't the other posts of Oilbird's removed also when he has directly represented SFRX since June of this year?
Okay Shorty81, I'll back it up right now since you asked me to.
Oilbird has posted a total of (36) times on this forum. He started on June 28th, 2010. In almost all of his postings, Oilbird speaks in direct statements of information that he has represented on behalf of Seafarer Exploration in his direct and orchestrated communications with them.
So, what is your argument now Shorty81?
It doesn't matter NOAD, Columbia joined the UNESCO Treaty on the 31st of October 1947. So again, there is no way Seafarer can make these claims as a foreign and American interest in maritime exploration and/or recovery.