% | $
Quotes you view appear here for quick access.

Barrick Gold Corporation Message Board

you are viewing a single comment's thread.

view the rest of the posts
  • pascuaforensics pascuaforensics Feb 5, 2013 10:17 PM Flag

    ABX pre stripping EXCUSE is a fraud= STRIPPED NAKED OFF PASCUA 100% ABX!

    Look mrstack of nothing

    why are you poling at TESOROS titles of Lopehandia and not at the fake ones of ABX?

    why you worry that titles were told or were shown or where produced?

    You are an ABX shareholder and worry about ABX not having title to TESOROS

    MSX was clear Mines Commissioner in Chile has issued leagl valid title holder authoority to Jorge Lopehandia over TESOROS

    If you had the title at hand, you would also see the injunction that since 2001 does not allow ABX to even enter PASCUA areas to ABX 1994-2013.

    Injunction C-1912-2001 that grants rights to JORGE LOPEHANDIA over TESOROS at this date.

    Funny part is, BARRICK GOLD CORPORATION or the carcass corporation that ABX make believe fraud has TESOROS concessions listed at SEC MARCH 5, 2011 6K, NYSE-SEC, whereat TESOROS is filed as owned by MINERA NEVADA SpA by ABX in a tota BRE-X like scam.

    ABX is the new BRE-X its bogus paper sales so wanton, it also is like ENRON

    SortNewest  |  Oldest  |  Most Replied Expand all replies
    • Indeed, Barrick is not on the Tesoro claims. As you stated, Barrick is not even allowed to enter the areas under injunction. I've been saying this for quite some time.

      Barrick is working and developing their Pascua Lama mine totally clear of the Tesoro claims. Barrick's Pascua Lama pit is located at the UTM coordinates of 4000000 E to 4020000; 6755000 N to 6757000 N, which can be confirmed by examining both Barrick's 43-101s and Mr. Albanez's maps. There is absolutely no overlap. I'm very glad you are confirming this for the MSX shareholders.

      Again for the hard of seeing: BARRICK IS NOT ON THE TESORO CLAIMS.

      All of Barrick's development is clear of any claims that JL may own. That means the lovely pictures of the construction progress shown on Barrick's website are all on Barrick's concessions. All of it. There is no superimposition of claims in the development area. Since the Tesoro claims do not overlap, they are inconsequential to the Pascua Lama mine.

      I also agree with a statement you made in another post. (I can't keep up with your frenetic posting pace, so I'll address it here.) Ore deposits don't move. Absolutely. They don't. If you will look at the Barrick March 30, 2005 Technical Report for Pascua Lama, Plate 4 shows precisely where Barrick's Pascua Lama mine pit with its tunnels, the International Border, topography, and surface geology are located clearly marked the UTM coordinates. (I won't try to convince you that this area also contains the ore deposit because you won't believe even if given incontrovertible evidence, but they have done a helluva lot of exploration there. So you can believe that the mineral resources detailed in the 43-101 somehow moved to JL's claims from the UTM coordinates of Barrick's pit if that makes you happy. It really doesn't matter. Reality, including geology, has a way of ignoring erroneous beliefs no matter how fervently held.)

      So we do have common ground. We both agree that:
      1. Barrick is not developing its mine on any of the disputed claims included the Tesoros.
      2. Ore deposits don't move.

      I feel so warm and fuzzy now that we have agreed.

      LOL I'm not a ABX shareholder. I never have been. My reasons for posting are more esoteric and enjoyable than that. And I'm not worried at all.

17.87+0.410(+2.35%)May 5 4:01 PMEDT