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.
this works 4 me!
http://www.microsofttranslator.com/tr
Please, NSC
read my post #12876
It should be our CEO and BOD equipped for answers,
to your questions, eh? !!
( wasen't it MSX whom promo'ed JL, not the other way around )
I think it's high time everyone focused on "job descriptions"
Thanks JL, peace be with you!
JL
JL, thank you for your most recent.
Fellow shareholders, It is of my opinion that our CEO, and BOD be the ones to step to the plate, and be held accountable to the MSX investor.
I believe share holder attention and concern should be focused at our corporate body, for all the answers going foreward. IMO
comments? ( why cannot any of you recognize that at this point it is our CEO and BOD whose feet need be held to the fire )
JL is only the base part of this sucess, and give credit where due and, to go foreward it should be in the hands of the bod/ceo
I think it high time we left JL at peace !!!!
It is starting to infuriate me our bod and ceo letting JL do all the fighting!
It seems to me that;
It apears to me that this whole title issue may be summed by understanding that:
-for whatever reason and by whom
-there is more than one claimed title holder of the MP area
-that may be registered or shown by sergoemin (not sure)
Now the case seems to point to the fact that by legal form there should be only one title holder to claims, however this is not the case by record.....
Summary of this hypothes is:
JL is in the process of trying to remove all other record name holders and leaving himself the only title holder,
by the phrase.......LAST MAN STANDING..
......AND BY CIRCUMSTANTUAL EVIDENCE IT MAY PROVE JL THE OWNER
If this be the case I can see another 2 years minimum of courts and legals......most likely 10 years!
(if any of this holds true, it's anyone's guess , where in this time line we are to-day!)
any thoughts ??
...and if this be the case, and JL has, best evidence, all you bashers, please give it a break OK ?
WAAAAAY to much "he said-she said"
I'm at the point respectfully, where as, I do not believe anyone..........
Time will tell, I hope
I do believe there a lot of personal motives floating around..... very sad!
I do suport, truth and justice!...the line in the sand, IMO
Great JR
one problem
nobody believes the story !!
YKR
fair enough question....
this one included....
I have respectively asked you, personally....who owns titles ??
as yet you have not answered........
honour begets honour!
PS
I keep watching for a reply to my
post #12542
..am I suprised of NO takers, or comments, to date???
I would go along with that, and that in-it's-
self would prove justice and truth served!
...however maybe other major gold miners would be more appropriate!
Gfork
I asume SB meant to reference, the tunnel being used for a belted converyor system, underground, as the crow flies,......as opposed to truck hauling from Chile to ARGT to process the ore from Chile, at the plant in Arg.
Stand to be corrected!
Well Guys and Ladies
There apears to be enough pictures in the respective posts ....
for someone to approx plot exactly where JL's
purported mining Title Claims are, overlayed on some of the pics
Well Mr Johnson, Mr. Lopenhandia, I ask you honourably....
are you up to the challenge to draft approx where JL/MSX
Title interest lie, to show us the investors????
One must credit where due, fact of truth, quite professional
on Barrick part, with the understanding of their business practices....
Imo this is another major stumbling block to get these approvals....I would guess barrick would have influence here.....
Quote from article in MW.com
In August, Torres filed criminal charges for injuries (libel and perjury) in Chile against Barrick and Minera Nevada on behalf of Lopehandia.
The latest petition by Torres will have to be approved by the Chilean Attorney General’s Office, the Supreme Court and the Foreign Ministry, as well as Canadian judicial authorities.
...what is the sucess chance here for these approvals
OK CAT
Please spell it out, with some proof......
WHO ARE THE TITLE OWNERS, IN YOUR OPINION, AS YOU CLAIM ???
upon that proof,I would extinguish my investment at one great loss for me, and swear god, not blame anyone!
I believe I'm tired of it all!
Braelorne
re:
ESTRECHO 43 1/60 and ESTRECHO 44 1/60 and ESTRECHO 45 1/60
are these titles in any way tied or overlapped to Jorge's claim of titles??
tia
Old News
...old news, but clear enough, where it's at....
Neither the Canadian National Stock Exchange nor the Investment Industry Regulatory Organization of Canada
(IIROC) accepts responsibility for the adequacy or accuracy of this release.
Mountainstar Gold Inc.
PO Box 10127, Suite 1500
701 West Georgia Street
Vancouver, BC V7Y 1C6
(MSX-CNSX)
NEWS RELEASE
November 19, 2012
BARRICK’S PASCUA LAMA PROTOCOL TRIAL UPDATE
Mountainstar Gold Inc. (the “Company”) (MSX-CNSX) wishes to announce legal disclosures on proceedings at the 23d Civil Court in Santiago: case C- 17.273-2012, Jorge Lopehandia v. Fisco de Chile (Chilean Government).
The action's objective is to nullify the Pascua Lama Protocol, legally called: Protocolo Adicional Específico de Integración y Complementación Minera, “Pascua Lama,” as published at Diario Oficial de Chile, December 11, 2004.
A writ for dilatory extensions was presented on behalf of FISCO DE CHILE, Defendant, v. Jorge Lopehandia, Plaintiff, by CDE (Consel for the Defense of the State).
Clients, users and beneficiaries of CDE are: President of the Republic of Chile, Ministries, Institutions, dependent services agents of the State and Regional Governments at all levels.
Mr. Lopehandia had submitted evidence of improper inclusion of the TESOROS concessions by Barrick Gold Corporation's Chilean subsidiaries, in the Protocol.
Specifically that, MINERA NEVADA LIMITADA had no title to the TESOROS concessions which remain under injunction on title, C-1912-2001 valid to date, in Mr. Jorge Lopehandia's name.
The impeached TESOROS concessions are included as an asset in the Protocol (or as an asset of BARRICK GOLD CORPORATION, to date); hence the action to nullify the TESOROS concessions as being subject to the Protocol.
THE INVESTIGATION BY THE CHILEAN AUTHORITIES, AS TO THE PASCUA LAMA PROTOCOL, IS NOW ONGOING.
On behalf of the Board of Directors,
“Brent Johnson”
Brent Johnson
President & CEO
..my guess would be a 6 months investigation, minimum time period.
Are you willing to share the links, for us less wise?
Time, shall be the proof, my dear friend!
SB YKR CAT
Re:
http://investorshub.advfn.com/boards/read_msg.aspx?message_id=81124935
Stop and think please.
If it were not the facts at law..ABX would of been all over JL/MSX
with law suits long before now, considering their biggest loss at PL.
Is it not the case ?, ..Barrick remains silent ??? regards JL's posts!
Keep up the excellent work JL/BJ
glta
Q
I love ya pal, but just have to comment.....
your all over the map !
...can never follow your bottom line..
I keep hoping this venture turns out well for everyone.
Keep the faith JL. /brothers
Thinking back over the past 6 to 12 months
and recalling in general ALL that has been said and exposed about Barrick and their activity,
there could be a lot which barrick, if they chose to make litigatous, could of responded.....but have not
however as the facts show, they remain very silent,
which shows they are at a serious disavantage.....
General conclusion, is
barrick does not have in their books what they need for ownership
of Mina Pascua
Very well done Jorge, you have suceeded over a lot of ground..
Hopefully we can see a reward conclusion in the near future,
say 6 months!
noteing the above general opinions and thoughts, I offer my vote of confidence to Jorge and what he has acheived thus far.
Well done and thank you for your updates/comments.
I believe negativity is good for a degree whereas it should cause those to close all doors or review the open ones.
I would hope our BOD are skilled well enough to have MSX Legal peruse the the MSX for J site well prior to adopting it,..... for the MSX Co website ??????
Hello???
tread careful "Will Robinson"
Can anyone comment upon the status of the Salts and Nitrates Titles
Are they still a matter of record on the Chilean Registry?
JL
Thank you very much, for your continued interest and concern, with your responces
for on going, issues.
I continue, I'm sure many others as well, support your position.
Keep safe, my friend.
GLTA
By the way everyone,
I am no Sheakspear, however I did send off 2 emails to
Sebastian Boyd in Santiago, with what I thought some good background cover links regards this whole deal.
I'll post any replies, see what happens ok!
JL,BJ,BOD/MSX
re MD's post 11639
This order only affects activities related to pre-stripping in Chile. Major construction activities on the Chilean side of the project, including work on the ore tunnel, the crusher and the camp will continue uninterrupted. Construction activities in Argentina are not impacted. At this time, pre-stripping is not a critical path item in the construction schedule and a temporary halt is not anticipated to impact the overall project schedule
Barrick has the goods, not the other way around, that's the read for me.
I would guess, It be complete suicide for ABX & shareholder legal suites, ....to continue a project they do not own ore titles for.
What, is the real story here?
JL
I do not wish to apear foolish.
re: In order to comply with electronic filings, one has to do in each property vertix, a cement demarkation that has to be placed accurately via GPS at the corresponding UTM coordinate.
Never mind if the location is a cliff or a hanging eve of a 4000+ meter mountain.
It has to be done and it has to be physically inspected and checked by SERNAGEOMIN engineers in order to be right or recommended fixing as per indications and observations.
....could it not be possible for someone other to destroy or remove these physical markers and make claim they never existed?
Is it, way to late for this to occur?
IL
You know Island, the rule in the entire work place is for the employees to be held accountable and when asked or challenged their
performance, regards return for their wages.....
Mr. B Johnson, I ask your comment and position regards this content, in view of the stockholders, or are we insignificant, based upon inside ownership?
Any other thoughts, fellow shareholders?
Why are us shareholders shying , from calling spades a spade?
JL
Truly a life dedication of exposing the truth. Great work, you are complemented.
However it remains,...until a effective body or group (Chile, gov't bodies, Canadian exchanges,or regulators of such, or responsible fincial Reporting Media etc.)
come forward and agree or validate all your claims as written in your post,.... MSX et all, most likely shall remain where it is today regards, value.
The media and Barrick regardless apear as the still victorious party regards Pascua Lama. This apears the world wide take on this subject as well.
I wish you the best good luck, of future endeavours to try and change the status quo!
Keep safe my friend.
GLTA
IL
man-oh-man our society is sure _____up from 1% at the top, (we all know that structure) where ever there is money, not to mention precious metals, there is serious greed and total "evil"
Total human control, is the last un-turned rock, and they are serious there as well, and working on it!
What a reality, in our world.....very sick!
barrick still positive according to their Nov report.
The increase costs, could possibly be legit
and nothing to do at all with the Chile Courts.
Who knows for sure eh!?
http://www.stockhouse.com/companies/stories/t.abx/8654874
PL mentioned throughout various places in report.
We have to hang in there..GLTA
Thanks Jorge, for any info you can share!
Someone may correct me.
The last time, approx 6 mos. ago, CNSX listed under, Capitalization
-Reserved for Issuance- 14M+/- shares
as of today
-Reserved for Issuance- 0 shares
...not sure, don't recall the # of shares Issued & Outstanding
at that time, or the impact of reserve shares.
I've lost a lot of faith in this Company,--DUE TO SILENCE,
at board level.
however, glta
Dazoff
No one , buying into the story, so far !! ??
..that's what appears to me.
(how can this be changed ???) maybe only, "by time"
glta
options for MSX, are very limited, seems like.
Is anyone keeping tabs on share dilution factor ?
NA/JL thanks for the info.
..great posts, good information, logical possibility
(McGuinty, Duncan, Weston etc.)
...however the way I see it is, the public has not bought into any of it...
MSX, the company are the only ones to change it all, ironically there is little info which meets regulator/commission guidelines and approvals.....so here we are! not good IMO.
Q
Drill results, no mater what the circumstances would be a "Galatic Maze",
being realistic,
JL/MSX have, a very long way to go, IMO
but only the BOD, could enlighten us, to the contrary..............
IOW
43-101's are part of corporate documents, and required by exchange regulations, for public stock trading, and to be filed on SEDAR at approval of regulators, for Investor Knowledge, but remain ownership of the related Mining Co.
That's how I understand it!
It would seem logical/legal that Drill Results belong entirely to the Mining Company whom charted/paid for the drill samples, to be taken.
I would not believe for a moment that the drill results are in any way tied to the titles as far as ownership is concerned.
Think, IMO, MSX or JL are, to be blunt, are SOL, when it comes to legal proof of mineral in the ground.
How does the whole Mining Gambit work!
I think we all, know better, than to ask/expect, or hope for, any of ABX's Exploration Data!
make sence? I would stand to be miss-informed or shown otherwise!
post your proof, please!