Over the past few days several individuals and news agencies have been questioning the validity of a conspiracy theory making the rounds.
The theory speculates that perhaps someone onboard may have intentionally scuttled (sank) the Spanish Trawler, Monte Galineiro, which went down near the Flemish Cap off Newfoundland earlier this week.
According to media reports the vessel was being closely tracked by a Canadian Coast Guard patrol vessel, with the intention of conducting a fisheries inspection once the weather cleared, when she suddenly issued a distress call. The vessel sank minutes later.
All hands onboard were plucked from the frigid North Atlantic but questions have since arisen about the incident and whether the sinking might have been intentional.
The theory itself is deeply flawed but there are never the less a lot of valid questions that should, and likely never will be, answered.
For a fairly large vessel to sink as quickly as this one did it would need to take on a lot of water very rapidly.
The most likely reason for such a sinking would be a large hole in the hull. The other likely possibility is that the “sea cocks”, which allow water to be taken in for ballast, were opened, either intentionally or not, thus the conspiracy theory.
Since the ship did not impact with a foreign object like an ice berg, the concern over why a four year old vessel took on water and sank so rapidly is a real one.
Another question is what she was doing on the very edge of Canada’s 200 mile limit when she sank? Some estimates put her at about 214 nautical miles from shore.
It would be of value to know what direction she was traveling in when observed by the Canadian Coast Guard. Was she heading toward Canadian waters? Was she heading away from them? Did the vessel appear to be attempting to evade or outrun the patrol vessel?
The captain of the Monte Galineiro claimed he heard an explosion in the engine room and reported a fire onboard. Why wasn’t there smoke visible before the Monte Galineiro went down and why did some crew members claim to be wakened from their sleep by an emergency alarm, not an explosion as claimed by the ship’s Captain?
These are valid questions. Unfortunately the Canadian government, under the auspices of the Department of Fisheries and Oceans, has said it will not be conducting any investigation into the incident. Preferring instead to leave that to the ship’s Country of origin, Spain.
Personally I doubt very much that anyone would intentionally sink their own vessel during February in the North Atlantic while sailing in 10 foot waves.
If they did, the majority of the 22 member crew, some of whom were rescued in their underwear, could not have been informed. To do so before putting them in such a frightening life and death situation would almost ensure that they would want to get their revenge on the perpetrator by telling authorities.
Indeed the crew knew a Coast Guard vessel was in the area but in reality, would anyone, other than a total psychopath, throw himself and more than 20 others into a situation where mere minutes mean the difference between life and death?
What could the motive be?
Would someone take that gamble simply to avoid the slap on the wrist that would be waiting for them even if they were found to have tons of illegal cod onboard?
I doubt it.
Perhaps the most sensible statement regarding the conspiracy theory came from St. John’s Maritime Lawyer, Owen Myers, in a “Sou’Wester” article, when he said the Monte Galineiro wouldn't face serious fines under "toothless" North Atlantic Fisheries Organization (NAFO) rules, even if it was convicted of illegal fishing. "It seems very unlikely to scuttle a $20-million vessel in order to escape a Canadian fisheries inspection," Myers said. "It's kind of like getting a traffic ticket. You're not going to blow up your Ferrari sports car because you've been given a parking ticket. I think it's really well-known that that is the problem with the NAFO convention - there are just no penalties in it."
There’s a lot of truth in those words.
It seems that nobody really knows what happened out there on the high seas but isn’t that the problem?
Shouldn’t somebody be trying to find out?
Putting aside the conspiracy theory itself for a moment, since it only clouds the issue, the question of exactly why this ship sank and what she was doing in the area prior to the sinking should not be cavalierly brushed aside, as is being done by Canadian authorities.
Late last week Newfoundland and Labrador premier, Danny Williams, issued a press release saying his government would not sign onto, or support, the latest trade discussions between Ottawa and the EU because of a number of ongoing issues, including NAFO’s lack of control over illegal fishing, the EU’s continued flouting of fisheries law and Canada’s lack of concern for protecting Newfoundland and Labrador’s interests.
The federal government’s lack of interest in finding answers to the questions being asked only serve to prove Mr. Williams point.
With trade talks taking place between Ottawa and the EU, with the premier’s position publicly known and with the lingering questions about this particular vessel left unanswered there is ample reason for the Newfoundland and Labrador premier and the people of the province to have concerns.
Was the vessel so loaded down with illegal fish that she ripped her engines apart, causing a fire, by pushing the ship to her limits in an effort to avoid inspection?
Were her fishing trawls in the water or onboard when the incident happened? Knowing this, or even if they were in neither place (had been cut) would add valuable information to the situation.
Was the crew of the Monte Galineiro doing nothing illegal at all? If so, an independent investigation would help clear the crew’s reputations, and that of their home nation.
Was there a design flaw in the ship, perhaps allowing the sea cocks to accidentally open or water to enter around the propeller shaft? If so, knowing the answer might save lives in future.
There are a lot of important questions left unanswered, not the least of which is why the government of Canada is doing nothing to find those answers.
The theory speculates that perhaps someone onboard may have intentionally scuttled (sank) the Spanish Trawler, Monte Galineiro, which went down near the Flemish Cap off Newfoundland earlier this week.
According to media reports the vessel was being closely tracked by a Canadian Coast Guard patrol vessel, with the intention of conducting a fisheries inspection once the weather cleared, when she suddenly issued a distress call. The vessel sank minutes later.
All hands onboard were plucked from the frigid North Atlantic but questions have since arisen about the incident and whether the sinking might have been intentional.
The theory itself is deeply flawed but there are never the less a lot of valid questions that should, and likely never will be, answered.
For a fairly large vessel to sink as quickly as this one did it would need to take on a lot of water very rapidly.
The most likely reason for such a sinking would be a large hole in the hull. The other likely possibility is that the “sea cocks”, which allow water to be taken in for ballast, were opened, either intentionally or not, thus the conspiracy theory.
Since the ship did not impact with a foreign object like an ice berg, the concern over why a four year old vessel took on water and sank so rapidly is a real one.
Another question is what she was doing on the very edge of Canada’s 200 mile limit when she sank? Some estimates put her at about 214 nautical miles from shore.
It would be of value to know what direction she was traveling in when observed by the Canadian Coast Guard. Was she heading toward Canadian waters? Was she heading away from them? Did the vessel appear to be attempting to evade or outrun the patrol vessel?
The captain of the Monte Galineiro claimed he heard an explosion in the engine room and reported a fire onboard. Why wasn’t there smoke visible before the Monte Galineiro went down and why did some crew members claim to be wakened from their sleep by an emergency alarm, not an explosion as claimed by the ship’s Captain?
These are valid questions. Unfortunately the Canadian government, under the auspices of the Department of Fisheries and Oceans, has said it will not be conducting any investigation into the incident. Preferring instead to leave that to the ship’s Country of origin, Spain.
Personally I doubt very much that anyone would intentionally sink their own vessel during February in the North Atlantic while sailing in 10 foot waves.
If they did, the majority of the 22 member crew, some of whom were rescued in their underwear, could not have been informed. To do so before putting them in such a frightening life and death situation would almost ensure that they would want to get their revenge on the perpetrator by telling authorities.
Indeed the crew knew a Coast Guard vessel was in the area but in reality, would anyone, other than a total psychopath, throw himself and more than 20 others into a situation where mere minutes mean the difference between life and death?
What could the motive be?
Would someone take that gamble simply to avoid the slap on the wrist that would be waiting for them even if they were found to have tons of illegal cod onboard?
I doubt it.
Perhaps the most sensible statement regarding the conspiracy theory came from St. John’s Maritime Lawyer, Owen Myers, in a “Sou’Wester” article, when he said the Monte Galineiro wouldn't face serious fines under "toothless" North Atlantic Fisheries Organization (NAFO) rules, even if it was convicted of illegal fishing. "It seems very unlikely to scuttle a $20-million vessel in order to escape a Canadian fisheries inspection," Myers said. "It's kind of like getting a traffic ticket. You're not going to blow up your Ferrari sports car because you've been given a parking ticket. I think it's really well-known that that is the problem with the NAFO convention - there are just no penalties in it."
There’s a lot of truth in those words.
It seems that nobody really knows what happened out there on the high seas but isn’t that the problem?
Shouldn’t somebody be trying to find out?
Putting aside the conspiracy theory itself for a moment, since it only clouds the issue, the question of exactly why this ship sank and what she was doing in the area prior to the sinking should not be cavalierly brushed aside, as is being done by Canadian authorities.
Late last week Newfoundland and Labrador premier, Danny Williams, issued a press release saying his government would not sign onto, or support, the latest trade discussions between Ottawa and the EU because of a number of ongoing issues, including NAFO’s lack of control over illegal fishing, the EU’s continued flouting of fisheries law and Canada’s lack of concern for protecting Newfoundland and Labrador’s interests.
The federal government’s lack of interest in finding answers to the questions being asked only serve to prove Mr. Williams point.
With trade talks taking place between Ottawa and the EU, with the premier’s position publicly known and with the lingering questions about this particular vessel left unanswered there is ample reason for the Newfoundland and Labrador premier and the people of the province to have concerns.
Was the vessel so loaded down with illegal fish that she ripped her engines apart, causing a fire, by pushing the ship to her limits in an effort to avoid inspection?
Were her fishing trawls in the water or onboard when the incident happened? Knowing this, or even if they were in neither place (had been cut) would add valuable information to the situation.
Was the crew of the Monte Galineiro doing nothing illegal at all? If so, an independent investigation would help clear the crew’s reputations, and that of their home nation.
Was there a design flaw in the ship, perhaps allowing the sea cocks to accidentally open or water to enter around the propeller shaft? If so, knowing the answer might save lives in future.
There are a lot of important questions left unanswered, not the least of which is why the government of Canada is doing nothing to find those answers.
What I will put in quotation below is the most likely reason why the Ottawa Government is unwilling to discuss the sinking of the Spanish ship and it is most likey for the same reason that the National Media, for instance the Globe and Mail, has published very few articles on the event.
ReplyDeleteCentral Canada gets a lot of International Trade from NAFTA while the province of Newfoundland and Labrador's Fish Resource is put under a great deal of pressure as a result of it and our province gets nothing from it. It is very important to the nations involved to have a source of the most coveted protein in the world -the Fish Resource, without any interference or pressure exerted by the Nation with the adjacany.
The time has long passed that some Premier of Newfoundland and Labrador interferred in the process and finally last week we had one who did in the name of Premier Danny Williams. Thanks Premier Williams you have put our beef on the Table. Now please do not drop the ball, we want to see this come to fruition for our province.
The Globe and Mail did publish an article on the sinking and as soon as the theory arose that it was skuttled it cut off the commentary. It published another article saying the crew had arrived in the port of St. John's and it took ONLY 7 comments on that article and then immediately closed the commentary section, almost as soon as it was opened.
I also see a Radio Station in our province whose Open Line Moderators were all onboard with the skuttling therory have now changed their tune. I wonder did Ottawa intervene. Some Businesses as we know are controlled by Ottawa?
Below is the quote I mentioned above in my first paragraph:
QUOTE "Canadian and European officials say they plan to begin negotiating a MASSIVE AGREEMENT to integrate Canada’s economy with the 27 nations of the European Union, with preliminary talks to be launched at an Oct. 17 summit in Montreal three days after the federal election." UNQUOTE
The entire article which contains the paragraph above is contained in the url address below:
http://www.bilaterals.org/article.php3?id_article=13223,
Anon,
ReplyDeleteI don't think I'd go so far as to accuse the phone in folks at VOCM of being muzzled over the scuttling theory. I'm not being muzzled or pressured by anyone and I don't buy that particular conspiracy theory myself (though one should never rule anyting out I guess).
As I said in my commentary, my problem is with the lack of interest in what really happened and what the vessel was up to.
If fisheries officers were interestied enough to do an at sea inspection why is there no interest in finding out what that inspection would have revealed if it had happened?
Is there something wrong with the vessel design that might lead to saving someone elses life if there is?
Was there a psycho onboard who scuttled the ship, I doubt it, but the crew and Spain will forever be the subject of debate over this issue if answers are not found so why would the government not want to clear the whole thing up once and for all? That's the big question isn't it.
What I tried to say in my commentary, but probably failed to do so, is that the two moderators of today have seem like they moderated their opinions somewhat since the beginning of the week.
ReplyDeleteMaybe I will change my opinion after listening to tonight's moderator. If he doesn't moderate his opinion from that which he has been espousing all week, I will probably have to recant my statement.
Anyway that is how their opinions were deciphered by me today. I wonder what everyone else thinks who heard them?
Patriot you offered a few theories on why the ship sank and you asked the question why would the government not want to clear the whole thing up once and for all?
ReplyDeleteI would say the most likely theory is that both the Canadian and Spanish Governments want to protect the upcoming proposed negotiations of a MASSIVE AGREEMENT to integrate Canada’s economy with the 27 nations of the European Union.
It means a coveted source of "fish protein", amonst other things for Spain with very little interference from the reciprocal country of the proposed Agreement; and for Canada the proposed Agreement will offer up the opportunity to do International Trade with 27 nations of the European Union to keep the Canadian Manufacturing and Agricultural provinces percolating.
Has there been any word on the depth to the seabed where it sank? Was it scuttled to avoid scrutiny of what it had aboard? Very curious.
ReplyDeleteYour problem with understanding the sinking as stated in your quotes below can only be answered in my opinion by saying "It would probably be too controversarial and probably detrimental to both Canada and Spain in clinching and signing the reciprocal Agreement between Canada and the 27 Nation EU." The reasons are better off not be identified. It is less of a liability to let sleeping dogs lie.
ReplyDeletePatriot's Quotes:
(a) "As I said in my commentary, my problem is with the lack of interest in what really happened and what the vessel was up to."
(b) "If fisheries officers were interestied enough to do an at sea inspection why is there no interest in finding out what that inspection would have revealed if it had happened?"
Mound of Sound asked a very good question.
ReplyDeleteHere is what I know.
Maybe nothing was going on out there but hen again the captain said they were fishing off the Flemish Cap. If the news reports are right and they were 400K east of St. John's then they were not over the Flemish Cap but over the nose of the Grand Banks.
What were they doing there?
I don't believe anyone would put their lives in jeopardy to avoid a slap on the wrist from NAFO, that's giving the agency far too much credit, but drug running might be something else again.
I'm not saying they were doing anything wrong but without an investigatin who knows.
Conspiracy theories aside, I believe investigating the wreck would not be as difficult as some might believe.
The Grand Banks are relatively shallow areas on the continental shelf. If my information is correct, the Grand Banks have a depth of anywhere from 120 feet to 600 feet, depending on the location.
Recreational divers can go to to 130 feet and professional divers, with decompression gear onboard, can go well past the 600 foot mark.
No subs or deep sea gear required.
Since the Coast Guard knows the exact location it wouldn't be a costly venture for authorities to dive to the ship and find out what it has to say.
Again, the question comes back to why aren't they willing to do it.
Ship sinks in mere minutes just before it's about to be boarded for inspection.
ReplyDeleteCaptain claims explosion and fire but no smoke visible.
crew member wakes up to sound of alarm bell, no explosion woke him.
Captain claims to be fishing off Flemish cap but coast guard puts the ship east of the cap, closer to the nose of the grand banks.
20-40 million dollar vessel (clearly owned by a company, not the captain himself). Would you send that vessel across the Atlantic to the edge of North America if the Captain really couldn't speak english in order to communicate with authorities, lighthouses, marine services, etc?
This does not pass the smell test by a long shot
You should update your facebook group you have over a hundred members now!
ReplyDeleteThanks for the suggestion Anon. It's now updated.
ReplyDeleteCanwest news service:
ReplyDelete...in a phone interview prior to Monday's news conference, the ship's Ghanaian cook told Canwest News Service there hadn't been a fire on board.
"There was no fire," said Justice Ehun...
Not to worry even if they can prove it was scuttled.
ReplyDeleteThe tyranny of the majority still have an out.
You can bet it will not be because it was about to be boarded.
It will be chaulked up as an insurance fraud.
and NAFO's 21 countries will continue to rape and pillage NL’s continental shelf, canada's TRAGEDY OF THE COMMONs outside the arbitrary 370km line.
Historical imperialism
Historical colonialism
So according to your Historical Imperialistic version of history Europeans own North America or have a right to hunt on NA soil because they crossed over the bearing straits when it was a land bridge?
Just how far back do you want to go back with this to Adam and Eve? If so Israel owns the world?
The thing is no national party of the in our TYRANNY OF THE MAJORITY political system will ever defend what is essentially the livelihood of 1.5% of the electorate.
It's time the Royal Commission was reassessed.
http://www.exec.gov.nl.ca/royalcomm/
NL-Ex Patriate please read the full National Post article contained in the address below, AbitibiBowaters think they own the right to the land that they were operating in Grand Fall/Windsor and as far as they are concerned it belongs to it, since the NAFTA Agreement signed by Ottawa gives them that sole right. Screw the province of Newfoundland and Labrador.
ReplyDeleteSo as you say in your article the EU, which Spain is part of thinks it has the right to our offshore waters under NAFTA. (The EU consists of 27 Countries not 21Countries as you stated, and will probably soon include Turkey as well and God only know which other country in the further future.) But it is not only the EU who fishes our waters since Korea and Japan do as well and they are part of Asia. Of course they are side agreements which Ottawa, no doubt, have signed for International Trade.
So as far as I can see NAFTA, which Ottawa is signatory to, with the reciprocal trade countres has signed our province's natural resources over to the World, while we have suffered immensely economy-less here while the rest of Canada was percolating economically and the now also expects Newfoundland and Labrador's resource base to remain on the block for the continuation of their economies once Ottawa with other world countries try and bring back to life the old economy, which today is in the doldrums because of the Depression. They expect Newfoundlanders and Labradorians, who finally rose up from a deep sleep to have their voices finally heard to go back to sleep and let the status quo remain.
We will never again allow it to happen; our voices will never fall silent ever again. Now that we have awoken to the giant which was controlling us during the past 60 years and keeping us down economically becuase we hadn't quite taken in what really was happening around us, we now must remain alert and see to it that the province of Newfoundland and Labrador grows an economy from its well endowed natural resource base, and that the giant will not have its way in seeing that our natural resource base works solely for the Mainland portion of Canada. That inequal system has to stop and Ottawa has to make sure, since it is the signatory to NAFTA, and as a result controls Newfoundland and Labrador's natural resource base, must see to it that the province of Newfoundland and Labrador grows a vibrant economy as well. As the article say they want to continue with the MASSIVE TRADE for the other provinces on our province's natural resource base. SICKENING ISN'T IT?
The article states "Trade -- massive and mutually beneficial -- has always been at the centre of the Canada-U. S. relationship".
I want to add here that it has never been mutually beneficial for the province of Newfoundland and Labrador, but if things were done equally it could have been and that is what the people of Newfoundland and Labrador want a mutual beneficial arrangement for them as well as the other Canadians. We do not want to scuttle the economy of Canada, we want equality, especially given the natural resource base we have in the province of NL
THE TITLE OF THE ARTICLE BELOW WHICH APPEARED IN THE NATIONAL POST ON 2/18/2009 12:00:00 AM
MAKES ME NAUSEOUS.
SICKENING TITLE BY THE NATIONAL POST-
{{{Canada's contradiction
Despite Ottawa's commitment to NAFTA, Newfoundland is jeopardizing U. S.-Canadian trade}}}
Mickey Kantor, Financial Post
Published: 2/18/2009 12:00:00 AM
The U. S.-Canada trade relationship is the largest between any two countries in the world. Trade -- massive and mutually beneficial -- has always been at the centre of the Canada-U. S. relationship. The signing of NAFTA, more than 14 years ago, marked a major step forward in building the economy of North America and solidified U. S. partnerships with Mexico and Canada--economically and politically.
http://www.financialpost.com:80/story.html?id=1299853
Are we going to stand silently by while the National Media prints stories like this, while 99 per cent of Newfoundlanders and Labradorians haven't a clue to what has gone on? After all things were non-transpaent in Canada throughout its history, and who would have known, especially the people of Newfoundland and Labrador, that the NAFTA Agreement signed by ottawa had our natural resources tied up in a straight jacket. It only came to light when Corporations like AbitibiBowaters started to unravel and then demanded that they owned a piece of the Newfoundland and Labrador resource pie, 3 times the size of PEI, simply because they operated there?
NL-Ex Patriate please read the full National Post article contained in the address below, AbitibiBowaters think they own the right to the land that they were operating in Grand Fall/Windsor and as far as they are concerned it belongs to it, since the NAFTA Agreement signed by Ottawa gives them that sole right. Screw the province of Newfoundland and Labrador.
ReplyDeleteSo as you say in your article the EU, which Spain is part of thinks it has the right to our offshore waters under NAFTA. (The EU consists of 27 Countries not 21Countries as you stated, and will probably soon include Turkey as well and God only know which other country in the further future.) But it is not only the EU who fishes our waters since Korea and Japan do as well and they are part of Asia. Of course they are side agreements which Ottawa, no doubt, have signed for International Trade.
So as far as I can see NAFTA, which Ottawa is signatory to, with the reciprocal trade countres has signed our province's natural resources over to the World, while we have suffered immensely economy-less here while the rest of Canada was percolating economically and the now also expects Newfoundland and Labrador's resource base to remain on the block for the continuation of their economies once Ottawa with other world countries try and bring back to life the old economy, which today is in the doldrums because of the Depression. They expect Newfoundlanders and Labradorians, who finally rose up from a deep sleep to have their voices finally heard to go back to sleep and let the status quo remain.
We will never again allow it to happen; our voices will never fall silent ever again. Now that we have awoken to the giant which was controlling us during the past 60 years and keeping us down economically becuase we hadn't quite taken in what really was happening around us, we now must remain alert and see to it that the province of Newfoundland and Labrador grows an economy from its well endowed natural resource base, and that the giant will not have its way in seeing that our natural resource base works solely for the Mainland portion of Canada. That inequal system has to stop and Ottawa has to make sure, since it is the signatory to NAFTA, and as a result controls Newfoundland and Labrador's natural resource base, must see to it that the province of Newfoundland and Labrador grows a vibrant economy as well. As the article say they want to continue with the MASSIVE TRADE for the other provinces on our province's natural resource base. SICKENING ISN'T IT?
The article states "Trade -- massive and mutually beneficial -- has always been at the centre of the Canada-U. S. relationship".
I want to add here that it has never been mutually beneficial for the province of Newfoundland and Labrador, but if things were done equally it could have been and that is what the people of Newfoundland and Labrador want a mutual beneficial arrangement for them as well as the other Canadians. We do not want to scuttle the economy of Canada, we want equality, especially given the natural resource base we have in the province of NL
THE TITLE OF THE ARTICLE BELOW WHICH APPEARED IN THE NATIONAL POST ON 2/18/2009 12:00:00 AM
MAKES ME NAUSEOUS.
SICKENING TITLE BY THE NATIONAL POST-
{{{Canada's contradiction
Despite Ottawa's commitment to NAFTA, Newfoundland is jeopardizing U. S.-Canadian trade}}}
Mickey Kantor, Financial Post
Published: 2/18/2009 12:00:00 AM
The U. S.-Canada trade relationship is the largest between any two countries in the world. Trade -- massive and mutually beneficial -- has always been at the centre of the Canada-U. S. relationship. The signing of NAFTA, more than 14 years ago, marked a major step forward in building the economy of North America and solidified U. S. partnerships with Mexico and Canada--economically and politically.
http://www.financialpost.com:80/story.html?id=1299853
Are we going to stand silently by while the National Media prints stories like this, while 99 per cent of Newfoundlanders and Labradorians haven't a clue to what has gone on? After all things were non-transpaent in Canada throughout its history, and who would have known, especially the people of Newfoundland and Labrador, that the NAFTA Agreement signed by ottawa had our natural resources tied up in a straight jacket. It only came to light when Corporations like AbitibiBowaters started to unravel and then demanded that they owned a piece of the Newfoundland and Labrador resource pie, 3 times the size of PEI, simply because they operated there?
I am fully aware that the EU comprises 27 equal nations. I was referring to the 21 nations who drag NL's grand Banks outside the 370 km EEC with Ottawa's TYRANNY OF THE MAJORITY blessing for trade and international relations.
ReplyDeleteBalance of power for change.