Registro Italiano Navale - Breaking News

[smackdaddy]

He didn't say it was an "offensive". He said that he found it to be "offensive".
Totally different.

And yes, your hectoring style amounts to "demanding answers"

On the "offensive" thing - true I missed the "is". Sorry evm. However, it doesn't much change the substance of what I wrote.

As for my "hectoring style", on this issue I've established context and presented questions - not demanded answers. If the very act of asking hard questions is offensive to you for some strange reason, I really can't help you out on that one.

So, now that it's come down to a matter of style versus substance, I'll happily bow out for the moment. Because those are always very silly arguments.

 

[evm1024]

On the "offensive" thing - true I missed the "is". Sorry evm. However, it doesn't much change the substance of what I wrote.

As for my "hectoring style", on this issue I've established context and presented questions - not demanded answers. If the very act of asking hard questions is offensive to you for some strange reason, I really can't help you out on that one.

So, now that it's come down to a matter of style versus substance, I'll happily bow out for the moment. Because those are always very silly arguments.

I rest my case.

I'm not here for a debate - take from my comments as much or as little as you wish.

Regards

 

[smackdaddy]

I rest my case.

I'm not here for a debate - take from my comments as much or as little as you wish.

Regards

Will do. Thanks evm.

 

[smackdaddy]

Should have some new information in soon lads. Hang in a mo.

Oh, and have a HNY.

(Wow - 8300+ views? Definitely not disinteresting.)

 

[smackdaddy]

Well, maybe bribery with RINA took place. Maybe it didn't. But after the story in Sunday's edition of the NZ Herald - I'm leaning toward didn't.

I think I'm now really tired of this whole thing. It's just a bottomless pit of BS.

 

[toad_oftoadhall]

Well, maybe bribery with RINA took place. Maybe it didn't. But after the story in Sunday's edition of the NZ Herald - I'm leaning toward didn't.

I think I'm now really tired of this whole thing. It's just a bottomless pit of BS.

NZ Herald story?

 

[Conachair]

NZ Herald story?

http://www.ybw.com/forums/showpost.php?p=3333296&postcount=1394

 

[toad_oftoadhall]

http://www.ybw.com/forums/showpost.php?p=3333296&postcount=1394

Thanks Conachair. His other offence was nothing financial so I figured it wasn't really relevant to the anchor issue. These offences are relevant IMHO.

Mind you in the case in point was it a refundable deposit, or was King entitled to keep it I wonder...

Academic, 'cos it looks like the Rina story was one more scam.

Also explains why people were so reluctant for anyone to look into the Rina thing. They must have realized that King didn't stand up to much scrutiny and got a bit jumpy when they realized this might all come out, as would the (probably) false Rina accusation.

Anyway, that's all cleared up. Always worth asking questions.

 

[smackdaddy]

Always worth asking questions.

True that Toad. Cheers.

 

[Rigger Mortice]

Also explains why people were so reluctant for anyone to look into the Rina thing. They must have realized that King didn't stand up to much scrutiny and got a bit jumpy when they realized this might all come out, as would the (probably) false Rina accusation.

Alternatively, most people simply realised that the whole RINA "story" was just a load of **** in the first place. There really is no need to create yet another conspiracy theory.

 

[smackdaddy]

Alternatively, most people simply realised that the whole RINA "story" was just a load of **** in the first place. There really is no need to create yet another conspiracy theory.

Perhaps. But you have to remember that it was a load initiated by Grant himself - the same guy whose word you seem to hold in very high regard for your own chosen "conspiracy theory". In light of that article, that word has become virtually worthless.

Kind of hard to have it both ways, eh?

 

[Rigger Mortice]

Perhaps. But you have to remember that it was a load initiated by Grant himself - the same guy whose word you seem to hold in very high regard for your own chosen "conspiracy theory". In light of that article, that word has become virtually worthless.

Kind of hard to have it both ways, eh?

I could point out how seriously you took Grants RINA comments and attempted to build them up into a much bigger story....one that simply didn't stand up to scrutiny. Only a short while ago you were promising that there was more to come.

The ROCNA story has, of course, been borne out in many different ways.

 

[iain789]

http://www.maritime-executive.com/a...sible-consequence-of-costa-concordia-incident

 

[smackdaddy]

I could point out how seriously you took Grants RINA comments and attempted to build them up into a much bigger story...

Of course I took them seriously*. They contain a very serious allegation. As for me attempting to "build something up", I've simply presented the case for why such an allegation is so serious. That's merely establishing context...of what is still a very big story if true. No "building up" required.

(*How can you tell which of his comments to "take seriously" and which to discard?)

.......one that simply didn't stand up to scrutiny.

Well, it's a bit soon to jump to that conclusion. More rightly, according to that article, Grant is the one that apparently hasn't stood up to scrutiny. That's your real conundrum here.

Only a short while ago you were promising that there was more to come.

Yes I was. Part of that was an offer from Grant via pm that he'd send me further information about the bribery after the holidays. Now that information doesn't really matter.

Regardless, as Iian points out above...I don't necessarily think the RINA story is over. It just won't by any means hinge on information from what is obviously a very questionable "witness".

 

[smackdaddy]

http://www.maritime-executive.com/a...sible-consequence-of-costa-concordia-incident

This is definitely going to be interesting to watch. Thanks for the link.

 

[toad_oftoadhall]

I could point out how seriously you took Grants RINA comments

Why not take such an allegation seriously? At that time King had a reputation for telling the truth. At let's be honest, after a while King's silence over Rocna-Rina was starting to cast serious doubt over the veracity of that claim.

The ROCNA story has, of course, been borne out in many different ways.

I'm sure at least one of King's stories has been found to be true, and I think Rocna have admitted it. There's a big dispute over numbers though. I wonder where the evidence is to back up King's words on that? Are people once again just assuming he's telling the truth becasue he has a completely undeserved reputation for telling the truth? I'd be really interested to know which of King's claims have been backed up by fact.

One thing we do know now. The people who are having a pop at Rocna *will* hide evidence if they think it helps their case. The only explanation for their opposition to verifying the Rina-Rocna story is that they knew both King and this story would not stand up to scrutiny.

Wonder what else they might know?